Whatever Happened to the American Negro

The Identity Crisis of So-Called African-American and Black People

Are Black people really Black? What does it mean to be a Black man or a Black woman? Is “Black” a real racial identity? Is Black a state of being, or is it a state of mind? Is Black a nationality? Furthermore, what does it mean to be Black, and what does it mean to be a nation? Are African Americans actually “African” Americans? Some of you are. Many of you are not. Many so called Blacks, and African Americans believe that they are actually Black, or African, when the simple truth of the matter is that they are neither. The linguistic terms ‘black’ and ‘african’ are false identities created and used to legalistically connect the natural American man and woman to the corporate fiction known as the United States of America, Inc.

The American Negro is the American Indian. “The so-called “Negro” is not mixed with Indian. He is the Indian! They call you African so you don’t fight as they steal your land.” Mark Amaru Pinkham The Return of the Serpents of Wisdom.

How were the colonialists able to make these false identifications? Misnomers were used to legally name and classify indigenous people as minorities under the fictional terms e.g., negro, colored, black, and African-American.

What is a Misnomer

It has been said that it is not what you are called but what you answer to. So what exactly is a misnomer? By definition, a misnomer is a deliberate misidentification of a person, place or thing. To use a misleading term; to misname. The misnaming of a person in a legal instrument, as in a complaint or indictment; any misnaming of a person or thing; a wrong or inapplicable name or title.  A use of a term asserted to be misleading; a misname. A term whose sense in common usage conflicts with a technical sense.

In the United States, a BLACK person is classified as a MINOR, and a MINORITY, but are those true signifiers of what BLACK people truly are?

It is a fact that American copper-colored people are indigenous to the Earth, and autochthonous to the Land.

When we say black, it means something different than when they say black. Regardless, in the 60’s and early 70’s it was an insult to be referred to as Black, now its a widely used and accepted term, what happened? Let’s get right down to the brass tacks. The term “Black” along with “Negro,” “Colored,” “African-American,” and “Minority,” are political and legal misnomers designed to hijack, misdirect and separate the autochthonous, origine, (ab)original, indigenous, Nijiis, IUs, et al., and their descendants from their unalienable bloodline inheritance to the land of so-called North, Central, and South America.

Motives of the Crime

Why did European countries like Spain, England, France, and the Church want to steal our ancestral autochthones identities? The answer is simple when you know the motives. Colonial invaders came to America to kill, steal, and destroy. Their goals were to usurp the land, air, water, resources, and manpower of the original people to their own profit and usage. It was even the goal of the Church to “convert” and put under contract/covenant, the very souls of the original people, who they considered to be “pagan.” In short, they wanted to take possession and control of everything, including our very own souls.

In order to complete the theft of the inherited cultural lands of America’s original inhabitants, the invaders want(ed) the original people to believe that they really have no claims to America because they themselves were brought in from another country as slaves, therefore they have no lawful, or legal claims to the land of America or its resources. Since the slavery story was not able to account for the presence of “Negroes” in America prior to 1492, the “Out of Africa” theory was concocted and applied to the original/aboriginal people of the Americas, with the implication being, that even if the Negroes were not imported as slaves, they were merely earlier immigrant/colonists to the Americas.

In order to destroy/steal the identities of the autochthonous, indigenous, copper-colored, dark-skinned, natural Americans the U.S. Government used warfare, policies like “eminent domain,” public schools and popular media in the form of books, films, television and radio programs, along with the cooperation of certain influential “African-American” educators, activists, and spiritual leaders like Jesse Jackson and others, who played a large role in promoting and getting people to accept racially weaponized political misnomers under the guise of political and spiritual unification and solidarity among the indigenous American populations.

Evidence

From Negro, and Colored, to Black and African-American

The shift from “Indian” to “Negro” to “Colored” to “Black” reflects the evolving social and political consciousness of people of African descent in the U.S.

An Evolution of Terms:

1. Negro:
   • The term “Negro” (from Spanish and Portuguese for “black”) was widely used from the colonial era through the mid-20th century to describe people of African descent. It was considered a formal and neutral term during much of this period, appearing in official documents, censuses, and organizations like the United Negro College Fund (UNCF).
   • By the 1960s, however, “Negro” began to fall out of favor as the Civil Rights Movement emphasized racial pride and self-determination. Many felt the term was tied to a history of subjugation and sought more empowering language.
2. Colored:
   • “Colored” was commonly used in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly in the segregated South. It was a broad term that could include people of mixed racial heritage or non-white individuals in general.
   • Walter Plecker was a prominent figure in the early 20th century who played a significant role in the racial reclassification of Native Americans in Virginia.
   • The term became associated with the Jim Crow era and segregation (e.g., “colored” water fountains, restrooms, etc.), leading to its decline in usage as the Civil Rights Movement sought to dismantle systemic racism and reject labels tied to segregation.
3. Black:
   • In the 1960s and 1970s, “Black” emerged as a term of pride and empowerment during the Black Power Movement. Activists and leaders like Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Ture) and the Black Panther Party embraced “Black” as a way to reclaim identity and reject the stigma associated with earlier terms.
   • The term “Black” emphasized solidarity, cultural pride, and resistance to systemic oppression. It was also more inclusive, encompassing people of African descent across the diaspora.
4. African American:
   • In the late 1980s, “African American” gained prominence, largely due to the advocacy of leaders like Jesse Jackson. This term emphasized the historical and cultural ties to Africa and aligned with the naming conventions of other ethnic groups in the U.S. (e.g., Irish American, Italian American).
   • “African American” became widely adopted in media, academia, and official contexts, though many still use “Black” as a simpler, more inclusive alternative.

Legislative Racial Reclassification

Walter Plecker was a prominent figure in the early 20th century who played a significant role in the racial reclassification of Native Americans in Virginia. As the first registrar of Virginia’s Bureau of Vital Statistics, Plecker was a staunch advocate of eugenics and white supremacy. He used the 1924 Racial Integrity Act, a law designed to preserve “racial purity,” to systematically reclassify Virginia Indians and other mixed-race individuals as “colored.” This act prohibited interracial marriage and defined a person as white only if they had “no trace of any blood other than Caucasian.”

Plecker’s enforcement of this law was particularly harsh toward Virginia’s Indigenous communities, such as the Pamunkey and Mattaponi tribes, who had long been recognized as distinct groups. He denied their Native identity, insisting that they were “colored” and therefore ineligible for the rights and recognition afforded to white citizens. This reclassification stripped Virginia Indians of their cultural and legal identity, denying them access to education, voting rights, and other civil liberties under the state’s rigid segregation system.

Plecker’s actions were part of a broader effort to erase Indigenous identity and enforce racial hierarchies. His policies had lasting consequences, disrupting tribal communities and forcing many to hide their heritage to avoid persecution. The legacy of his work persisted for decades, contributing to the systemic marginalization of Virginia’s Native American populations. It was not until the late 20th century that federal recognition and efforts to reclaim Indigenous identity began to reverse some of the damage caused by Plecker’s policies.

From Black to African-American

Although he did not create the term, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, a prominent civil rights leader and politician, played a significant role in popularizing and advocating for the use of the term “African American” as a preferred identifier for Black Americans. His efforts were part of a broader movement to promote racial pride, cultural heritage, and a more accurate reflection of the historical and ancestral roots of Black people in the United States.

Jesse Jackson’s Role in Promoting “African American”:

1. Public Advocacy: In the late 1980s, Jesse Jackson actively campaigned for the adoption of “African American” as a more dignified and historically grounded term than “Black.” He argued that “African American” emphasized the cultural and ancestral ties to Africa, while also aligning with the naming conventions of other ethnic groups in the U.S. (e.g., Italian American, Irish American).
2. National Press Conference (1988): In December 1988, Jackson held a notable press conference where he called for the widespread use of “African American.” He stated, “Just as we were called Colored, but were not that, and then Negro, but not that, to be called Black is just as baseless. Every ethnic group in this country has a reference to some land base, some historical cultural base. African Americans have hit that level of cultural maturity.”
3. Cultural and Historical Context: Jackson’s push for the term was part of a broader effort to reclaim and celebrate African heritage, which had been systematically erased during slavery and segregation. By embracing “African American,” he sought to foster a sense of pride and connection to the African diaspora.
4. Media Influence: Jackson’s advocacy gained significant traction in the media, leading to widespread adoption of the term in newspapers, television, and public discourse. His influence helped shift societal norms and encouraged institutions, including government agencies and educational organizations, to adopt “African American” in official communications.
5. Political and Social Impact: Jackson’s efforts aligned with the growing consciousness of African diasporic identity during the late 20th century, influenced by movements like Black Power and Afrocentrism. His advocacy helped solidify “African American” as a term that reflected both cultural heritage and political empowerment.

Why the Term “African-American” Gained Acceptance:

• Cultural Pride: The term “African American” resonated with many Black Americans who sought to honor their African roots and assert their identity in a way that reflected their history and contributions to the United States.
• Universality: Unlike “Black,” which is a color-based descriptor, “African American” provided a geographic and cultural reference point, similar to terms used by other ethnic groups.
• Historical Accuracy: The term acknowledged the forced migration of Africans to the Americas during the transatlantic slave trade and the enduring impact of African heritage on American culture.

Legal Opposition to the Term “African-American”

While not everyone adopted the term “African-American” – some preferred “Black” for its simplicity and inclusivity; Jesse Jackson’s advocacy played a pivotal role in making “African American” a widely accepted and respected identifier. His efforts contributed to a broader cultural shift toward recognizing and celebrating the African roots of Black Americans.

Another historical investigator who goes by the name “Anthony Anthonys” on the TikTok social media platform called my attention to the million dollar lawsuit filed by Avis J. Smith against Rev. Jesse Jackson and Ramona H. Edelin in the District Court in Washington, DC in August of 1994. Smith’s lawsuit alleged that Jackson, and Edelin helped to institutionalize and make use of the term “African-American” without the permission of the People. According to Smith, “Neither Jackson, nor Ms. Edelin, has the legal authority to dictate, through their formalized gathering, what we call ourselves, nor do we have the legal obligation to accept it.” The aforementioned court case is documented in the book “African American: The Opposition Court Case” by Avis J. Smith.

Out of Africa Theory

The “Out of Africa” theory, also known as the Recent African Origin model, is the most widely accepted explanation for the dispersal of modern humans (Homo sapiens). According to this theory, modern humans evolved in Africa around 200,000 to 300,000 years ago, likely in the region of East Africa. Around 70,000 to 100,000 years ago, a small group of Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa, spreading across the globe and eventually replacing earlier hominin populations such as Neanderthals and Homo erectus. This migration is supported by genetic, fossil, and archaeological evidence, including the fact that all non-African populations today share a common genetic lineage traced back to Africa. The theory also aligns with the gradual development of complex tools, art, and symbolic behavior, which emerged in Africa before appearing elsewhere.

An alternative theory is the “Multiregional Hypothesis,” which proposes that modern humans evolved simultaneously in different regions of the world from earlier hominin populations that had already dispersed out of Africa. Proponents of this model argue that continuous gene flow between these populations allowed for the evolution of Homo sapiens as a single species. While this theory explains some regional continuity in fossil traits, it has been largely challenged by genetic evidence, which shows that the vast majority of modern human DNA can be traced back to a recent African origin, with only limited interbreeding with archaic humans like Neanderthals and Denisovans.

Another alternative is the “Assimilation Model,” which combines elements of both the Out of Africa and Multiregional theories. This model suggests that while modern humans primarily originated in Africa and spread globally, they also interbred with local archaic populations, incorporating some of their genetic material. This is supported by evidence of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA in modern non-African populations, indicating that limited interbreeding occurred. However, the overall genetic contribution from these archaic groups is relatively small, reinforcing the dominance of the African lineage.

In summary, the Out of Africa theory remains the most plausible (especially from the White (Western) historical paradigm) and widely supported model for the origin and dispersal of modern humans, backed by extensive genetic and fossil evidence. While alternative theories like the Multiregional Hypothesis and Assimilation Model offer nuanced perspectives, they do not fully account for the overwhelming genetic data pointing to a recent African origin. Nonetheless, these alternatives highlight the complexity of human evolution and the likelihood of some interbreeding with archaic hominins, adding depth to our understanding of human history.

Children of the Earth – Not Just Africa

It is the writer’s humble opinion that the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was getting the world to believe that all the “Black” people in North, South, and Central America were brought over in slave ships, and that there were not millions of dark skinned, “red” skinned, copper-colored, melanin dominant people of every hue and shade, shape and size, including real life giants, many being seven foot tall and above, living here in the Americas, BEFORE the colonized government of the (Corporation of the) United States of America.

Although it is generally accepted by the scientific community to be the most plausible explanation of human evolution and development, the “Out of Africa” theory is just that, a theory. In order for us to have a more complete investigation it would be prudent to recognize that there are other theories that must be considered.

Autochthonous Theory

The Autochthonous Theory of human development is a less widely accepted hypothesis that posits modern humans (Homo sapiens) evolved independently in multiple regions of the world from local archaic hominin populations, without significant migration or gene flow from Africa. This theory challenges the central premise of the Out of Africa model by suggesting that the transition from archaic to modern humans occurred in situ across different continents. Proponents of this theory often point to regional continuity in fossil records, such as similarities between Homo erectus fossils in Asia and modern Asian populations, or between African Homo heidelbergensis and modern Africans, as evidence for parallel evolution.

However, the Autochthonous Theory faces significant challenges, particularly from genetic evidence. Studies of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y-chromosomal DNA consistently show that all modern humans share a common ancestor who lived in Africa relatively recently, around 200,000 years ago. This genetic “bottleneck” strongly supports the idea that modern humans originated in Africa and later dispersed, rather than evolving independently in multiple regions. Additionally, the limited genetic contributions from archaic humans like Neanderthals and Denisovans, as revealed by ancient DNA analysis, suggest that while some interbreeding occurred, it was not enough to support the idea of independent, parallel evolution across continents.

According to modern day scientific consensus (take that with several grains of salt,) when compared to the Out of Africa theory, the Autochthonous Theory lacks robust genetic support and struggles to explain the uniformity of modern human DNA outside of Africa. While it raises interesting questions about regional continuity and the complexity of human evolution, it is generally considered less plausible than the Out of Africa model. The Assimilation Model, which incorporates some aspects of regional continuity through limited interbreeding, offers a more balanced alternative that aligns better with the genetic and fossil evidence. In conclusion, while the Autochthonous Theory provides a thought-provoking perspective, it is largely overshadowed by the overwhelming evidence supporting the Out of Africa theory as the primary explanation for the origin and dispersal of modern humans.

We Were Always Here

It is the assertion of my own ancestors and many others that we as a people were always here in the Americas. We were certainly here long before Columbus. We originated from the red Earth of this place as can be attested by our copper, cinnamon, mahogany, and ebony complexions.

Identity Theft

It is a fact that alien invaders came to America (in the form of settlers, colonists, and religious “converters”) to kill, steal and plunder the natural wealth; To take over land, air, water, and resources, and to destroy what could not be taken. They want true autochthonous/indigenous Americans to think that we are not from America, and therefore have no lawful or legal claims to the land or its resources. Through their insidious paper genocide, these foreign/alien invaders have fostered the fictions that all, or very nearly all, of the indigenous, and native American peoples were either wiped out through disease and famine, or exterminated through the brutal violence and warfare of various colonial powers, and that millions of people from the African continent were shipped across the Atlantic as replacements to be enslaved and exploited by the colonist.

Paper Genocide

It has been said that the pen is mightier and the sword. Since the invading colonial powers could not kill us all through warfare, famine, pestilence, biological, and chemical warfare, they simply wrote us out of history, and rewrote themselves in. This phenomenon is known as a “paper genocide,” in that the victims of the paper genocide still exist, they simply don’t know who they really are.

The term “Paper Genocide” refers to the systematic erasure or denial of Native American identity and existence through bureaucratic means, such as census records, legal documents, and government policies. This tactic was used to diminish the visibility and legal recognition of Indigenous peoples, often as part of broader efforts to assimilate them into Euro-American society, seize their lands, and eliminate their cultural and political sovereignty.

How Paper Genocide Was Carried Out:

1. Census Records: Native Americans were often excluded, misclassified, or undercounted in U.S. Census records. For example, individuals with mixed ancestry might be labeled as “Black” or “White,” effectively erasing their Indigenous identity.
2. Blood Quantum Laws: The U.S. government and some tribal nations implemented blood quantum requirements to determine Native American identity. These laws required individuals to prove a certain percentage of Indigenous ancestry to be recognized as tribal members. Over time, this policy reduced the number of legally recognized Native Americans, as intermarriage and generational dilution of “blood quantum” made it harder for descendants to qualify.
3. Termination and Assimilation Policies: During the 19th and 20th centuries, U.S. policies such as the Dawes Act (1887) and the Indian Termination Policy (1950s) aimed to dismantle tribal landholdings and assimilate Native Americans into mainstream society. These policies often stripped Indigenous peoples of their legal status and rights, effectively erasing their identity on paper.
4. Forced Relocation and Displacement: The removal of Native Americans from their ancestral lands, such as during the Trail of Tears, disrupted tribal structures and made it difficult for communities to maintain their cultural and legal identity.
5. Denial of Tribal Recognition: Many tribes were denied federal recognition, which stripped them of legal rights, access to resources, and the ability to govern themselves. Without recognition, these groups were often excluded from historical records and official narratives.

Why Paper Genocide Was Used:

1. Land Acquisition: By erasing Native American identity, the U.S. government could justify the seizure of Indigenous lands. If Native Americans were not officially recognized as distinct peoples or nations, their claims to land were easier to dismiss.
2. Assimilation: Paper genocide was part of a broader strategy to assimilate Native Americans into Euro-American society, erasing their cultural and political autonomy. This was seen as a way to “civilize” Indigenous peoples according to colonial standards.
3. Resource Control: Denying Indigenous identity allowed the government and settlers to exploit natural resources on Native lands without legal or moral constraints.
4. Political Suppression: By reducing the number of recognized Native Americans, the government weakened tribal sovereignty and political power, making it easier to impose federal control.

Impact of Paper Genocide:

Paper genocide has had long-lasting effects on Native American communities, including the loss of cultural heritage, legal rights, and access to resources. It has also created challenges for modern descendants seeking to reclaim their Indigenous identity and gain tribal recognition. Efforts to combat paper genocide include genealogical research, legal battles for tribal recognition, and cultural revitalization movements.

In summary, paper genocide was a deliberate tactic used to erase Native American identity and presence, facilitating land dispossession, cultural assimilation, and political suppression. Its legacy continues to affect Indigenous communities today, highlighting the importance of acknowledging and addressing this historical injustice.

The American Negro

The term “Negro“ (from Spanish and Portuguese for “black”) was historically used to describe people of African descent, particularly those with darker skin tones. However, there were instances in which the term was applied more broadly to other non-European groups, including Indigenous Americans, often referred to as “copper-colored” or “red” in historical contexts. This usage was rooted in the racial classification systems imposed by European colonizers and reflects the broader history of racial categorization in the Americas.

When:

1. Colonial Era (16th–18th centuries): During the early colonial period, European settlers and administrators often used imprecise and overlapping racial terms to categorize non-European peoples. The term “Negro” was sometimes applied to Indigenous Americans, particularly in regions where African and Indigenous populations intermixed, such as the Caribbean and parts of Latin America.
2. 19th Century: In some 19th-century documents, particularly in the United States and Latin America, the term “Negro” was occasionally used in a broader sense to describe non-white populations, including Indigenous Americans. This was especially true in areas where racial distinctions were blurred due to intermarriage or mixed ancestry.
3. Census and Legal Records: In some historical census records and legal documents, Indigenous Americans or people of mixed African and Indigenous ancestry might have been classified as “Negro” due to the lack of clear racial categories or the desire to enforce racial hierarchies.

Why:

1. Racial Hierarchies and Colonialism: European colonizers imposed racial hierarchies that often grouped non-European peoples into broad, oversimplified categories. The term “Negro” was part of this system, which sought to classify and control non-white populations.
2. Ambiguity and Misidentification: European settlers often lacked a nuanced understanding of the diverse cultures and physical appearances of Indigenous peoples. As a result, they sometimes used terms like “Negro” to describe Indigenous Americans, particularly those with darker skin tones or mixed ancestry.
3. Intermingling of Populations: In regions where African and Indigenous populations lived in close proximity or intermarried, the distinction between “Negro” and “Indian” became blurred. This led to the occasional use of “Negro” to describe people of Indigenous descent, especially if they were perceived as having African ancestry.
4. Cultural and Linguistic Context: In Spanish and Portuguese colonial contexts, the term “Negro” was sometimes used more broadly to describe anyone with darker skin, including Indigenous Americans. This usage reflected the linguistic and cultural frameworks of the colonizers rather than the self-identification of the people being described.

Shift in Terminology:

By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the term “Negro” became more specifically associated with people of African descent, and its application to Indigenous Americans largely disappeared. Instead, terms like “Indian,” “Native American,” or specific tribal names became more common and respectful.

Contemporary Perspective:

Today, the term “Negro” is considered outdated and offensive when used to describe any group of people. For Indigenous Americans, the preferred terms include “Native American,” “American Indian,” “Indigenous,” or specific tribal names, depending on the context and the preferences of the individuals and communities involved.

In summary, the use of “Negro” to describe the “copper-colored” people of the Americas was a product of colonial racial classification systems, ambiguity in racial terminology, and the intermingling of African and Indigenous populations. This usage reflects the broader history of racial categorization and the evolving understanding of identity in the Americas.

Authentic Indigenous Identities

If Negros, Coloreds, Blacks, Native Americans and Indians are false/artificial identities, then how did the people currently living under these misnomers identify themselves?

Before contact with Christopher Columbus and other European explorers, the original inhabitants of the Americas, often referred to as “copper-colored” in historical European descriptions, identified themselves by a wide variety of names based on their specific tribal, linguistic, and cultural affiliations. There was no single term that encompassed all Indigenous peoples of the Americas, as they were incredibly diverse, with thousands of distinct cultures, languages, and identities. Below is a relatively small list of some of the nations and peoples living in the Americas prior to European contact.

We The People

1. Mississippi Mound Builders: Who They Were: The mound builders were a collection of Indigenous cultures in North America, particularly in the Mississippi River Valley and the Eastern Woodlands, who constructed earthen mounds for ceremonial, burial, and residential purposes. Notable mound-building cultures include the Adena (1000 BCE–200 CE), Hopewell (200 BCE–500 CE), and Mississippian (800–1600 CE) cultures.
   • Significance: The mound builders were among the earliest complex societies in North America, and their descendants include many modern Indigenous nations, such as the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek, and Cherokee.
   • RolepL in Indigenous History: While the mound builders were influential in the development of cultural and architectural traditions in North America, they were not the sole ancestors of all Indigenous peoples. They represent one of many cultural traditions that emerged in the Americas.
2. Moors – The term “Moor” historically refers to the Muslim inhabitants of North Africa, particularly those of Berber and Arab descent, who ruled parts of the Iberian Peninsula (modern-day Spain and Portugal) from the 8th to the 15th centuries.
   • The Moors were known for their advanced knowledge in science, mathematics, architecture, and navigation, which influenced European culture during the Middle Ages.
   • According to the scholarship of C Freeman El, the term “Moor” also refers to the true ethnicity of so-called “black” people. He contends that the term “moor” means “thick lips, dark skin, and curly hair; furthermore, “moor” also refers to a specific bloodline inheritance of certain people of Africa and the Americas.
   • From the root of Moor, “MR,” we also get the words for “mister, and master.” Today the letters MR represent the abbreviation of the word “mister”
3. IU – Jew – Hebrew
4. Anasazi – The Anasazi, also known as the Ancestral Puebloans, were an ancient Native American culture that thrived in the Four Corners region of the southwestern United States (present-day Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah) from approximately 200 to 1300 CE. They are renowned for their impressive architectural achievements, including cliff dwellings, multi-story stone pueblos, and intricate road systems, with notable sites such as Chaco Canyon and Mesa Verde. The Anasazi were skilled farmers, cultivating maize, beans, and squash, and they developed sophisticated irrigation techniques to support their agriculture in arid environments. They also created distinctive pottery and woven goods. Around the late 13th century, the Anasazi abandoned many of their settlements, likely due to a combination of factors such as prolonged drought, resource depletion, and social upheaval. Their descendants are believed to include modern Pueblo tribes, such as the Hopi and Zuni, who continue to honor many of their ancestral traditions.
5. Aniyunwa – Cherokee
6. Ani-Tsalagi Onaselagi – Cherokee, Lenape; Ani-Tsalagi (also spelled Ani-Tsalaqi) is the Cherokee word for themselves, often translated as “The Principal People” or “The Real People,” reflecting their deep cultural identity and connection to their ancestral lands in the southeastern United States, particularly in regions now part of Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and South Carolina. 
7. Amaru –
8. Folsom –
9. Niiji – In the context of the Ojibwe language, “niiji” (or “niijii”) is a form of direct address, traditionally used by men to address each other, meaning “my brother, my cousin (male parallel cousin), my fellow man”. niijii is a form of direct address (vocative) traditionally used by men talking to each other. It is also proposed by Native activists as a replacement for the terms “Indian” and “Native American”. niijii can be used by any Native person to refer to themselves or their people, regardless of origin.
10. Olmec, Aztek, Toltek, Mixtec
11. Hopi: The Hopi (Pueblo Indians) people are a Native American tribe primarily residing in northeastern Arizona, known for their rich cultural heritage and deep spiritual connection to the land. They inhabit a series of mesa-top villages, including Oraibi, which is one of the oldest continuously inhabited settlements in the United States, dating back over a thousand years. The Hopi are renowned for their intricate pottery, kachina doll carvings, and traditional ceremonies, such as the Snake Dance, which reflect their agricultural lifestyle and reverence for nature. Their society is matrilineal, with clans playing a central role in social organization. The Hopi have maintained a strong commitment to preserving their language, traditions, and autonomy despite external pressures, including colonization and modernization. Their philosophy emphasizes peace, harmony, and a profound respect for the natural world.
12. Ojibwe – The Ojibwe are a large group of Indigenous people who live in Canada and the United States. They are part of the Anishinaabeg cultural group, which also includes the Chippewa and Saulteaxu. Anishinaabeg means “True People” or “Original People.”
13. Taino (Caribbean): The Taino people, who were among the first Indigenous groups encountered by Columbus in the Caribbean, referred to themselves as “Taino,” which means “good” or “noble” in their language. They called their island “Borikén” (Puerto Rico) and “Kiskeya” (Hispaniola).
14. Nahuatl-speaking Peoples (Mesoamerica): The Aztecs (or Mexica) of central Mexico referred to themselves as “Mexica” and called their homeland “Anahuac.” The term “Nahua” refers to the broader group of Nahuatl-speaking peoples.
15. Inca (Andes): The Inca Empire, centered in modern-day Peru, referred to themselves as “Tawantinsuyu,” meaning “the four regions” in Quechua, their language. The term “Inca” specifically referred to the ruling class.
16. Lakota/Dakota/Nakota (Great Plains): The Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota peoples, often collectively referred to as the Sioux, called themselves “Očhéthi Šakówiŋ,” meaning “Seven Council Fires.” Each group had its own distinct identity.
17. Anishinaabe (Great Lakes): The Anishinaabe people, including the Ojibwe, Odawa, and Potawatomi, referred to themselves as “Anishinaabe,” meaning “original people” or “good humans.”
18. Diné (Southwest): The Navajo people call themselves “Diné,” meaning “the people.” Similarly, the Apache, who are closely related, refer to themselves as “Inde” or “Nde.”
19. Haudenosaunee (Northeast): The Haudenosaunee, also known as the Iroquois Confederacy, called themselves “Haudenosaunee,” meaning “People of the Longhouse.”
20. Maya (Mesoamerica): The Maya people identified themselves by their specific city-states or regions, such as the “K’iche’,” “Yucatec,” or “Itza,” rather than a single overarching term.
21. Iroquois – also known as the Haudenosaunee (People of the Longhouse), are a historically powerful and influential confederacy of Native American tribes in the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada. The original five nations of the Iroquois Confederacy—Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca—were joined by the Tuscarora in the early 18th century, forming the Six Nations. The confederacy was founded around the 12th to 15th centuries, based on the Great Law of Peace, a democratic constitution that emphasized unity, balance, and consensus among the member nations
22. Maroon – The Maroon people are descendants of enslaved Africans who escaped captivity in the Americas and established independent communities in remote or inhospitable regions, such as mountains, jungles, or swamps. The term “Maroon” derives from the Spanish word cimarrón, meaning “wild” or “untamed,” and refers to their resistance to slavery and their fight for freedom. Maroon communities emerged primarily in the Caribbean, Latin America, and parts of North America, including Jamaica, Suriname, Brazil, Colombia, and the southeastern United States.
23. Yamassee – The Yamasee (or Yamassee) people were a Native American tribe originally from the southeastern region of what is now the United States, primarily in present-day northern Florida and southern Georgia. They were part of the Muskogean language family and were closely associated with other Indigenous groups in the region, such as the Creek and Guale. The Yamasee were known for their agricultural practices, growing crops like maize, beans, and squash, and for their participation in trade networks with European colonists, particularly the Spanish and English.
24. Seminole – The Seminole people are a Native American tribe originally formed in the 18th century through the merging of various Indigenous groups, including Creek migrants from Georgia and Alabama, as well as local tribes in Florida such as the Miccosukee and remnants of the Yamasee and Apalachee. The name “Seminole” is derived from the Creek word simanó-li, meaning “runaway” or “wild,” reflecting their origins as a diverse group of people seeking refuge in the Florida wilderness to escape European colonization and conflict.
25. Blackfoot – The Blackfoot Confederacy, also known as the Niitsitapi or Siksikaitsitapi (meaning “Real People” or “Blackfoot-speaking People”), is a historically powerful alliance of Indigenous peoples in the northern Great Plains of North America. The confederacy originally consisted of three main tribes: the Siksika (Blackfoot), Kainai (Blood), and Piegan (Piikani), with a fourth group, the Northern Piegan, located in what is now Canada. The Blackfoot traditionally inhabited a vast territory spanning parts of present-day Montana in the United States and Alberta and Saskatchewan in Canada.

Common Themes:

• “The People”: Many Indigenous groups used terms in their own languages that translate to “the people” or “original people,” emphasizing their connection to their land and their distinct identity.
• Tribal or Clan Names: Identities were often tied to specific tribes, clans, or linguistic groups rather than a pan-Indigenous identity.
• Geographic or Cultural Identifiers: Names often reflected geographic features, cultural practices, or historical narratives unique to each group.

European Misnomers:

After European contact, many Indigenous groups were given names by colonizers that did not reflect their self-identification. For example:

• The official story is that the term “Indian” originated from Columbus’s mistaken belief that he had reached the Indies (Asia).
• Names like “Sioux” (from an Ojibwe word meaning “enemy”) or “Eskimo” (from an Algonquian word meaning “eater of raw meat”) were imposed by outsiders and are not preferred by the groups themselves.

The original inhabitants of the Americas had rich and diverse ways of identifying themselves, rooted in their languages, cultures, and histories. These self-identifications were deeply tied to their specific communities and worldviews, reflecting the incredible diversity of Indigenous peoples long before European contact. Today, many Indigenous communities continue to use these traditional names to assert their identity and sovereignty.

Important Definitions

BLACK. Of or belonging to a racial group having brown to black skin, especially one of African origin. Of or belonging to an American ethnic group descended from African peoples having dark skin; African-American. Appearing to emanate from a source other than the actual point of origin. Used chiefly of intelligence operations.

The same root produced Middle English blake “pale,” from Old English blac “bright, shining, glittering, pale;” the connecting notions being, perhaps, “fire” (bright) and “burned” (dark), or perhaps “absence of color.” According to OED, in Middle English “it is often doubtful whether blac, blak, blake, means ‘black, dark,’ or ‘pale, colourless, wan, livid’ “; and the surname Blake can mean either “one of pale complexion” or “one of dark complexion.” 

Black was used of dark-skinned people in Old English. Of coffee with nothing added, attested by 1796. The meaning “fierce, terrible, wicked” is from late 14c. The figurative senses often come from the notion of “without light,” moral or spiritual. Latin niger had many of the same figurative senses (“gloomy; unlucky; bad, wicked, malicious”). The metaphoric use of the Greek word, melas, however, tended to reflect the notion of “shrouded in darkness, overcast.” In English it has been the color of sin and sorrow at least since c. 1300; the sense of “with dark purposes, malignant” emerged 1580s (in black art “necromancy;” it is also the sense in black magic). 

MINOR. An infant or person who is under the age of legal competence. One under twenty-one. A term
derived from the civil law, which describ- ed a person under a certain age as less than so
many years. Minor viginti quinque annis, one
less than twenty-five years of age. Inst. 1, 14, 2; Audsley v. Hale, 303 Mo. 451, 261 S.W. 117,
123.
Also, less; of less consideration; lower; a per- son of inferior condition. Fleta, 2, 47, 13, 15;
Calvin.

MINORITY. The state or condition of a minor; infancy. Opposite of “majority.” See Minor.
The smaller number of votes of a deliberative assembly; opposed to majority (q.v.)
In context of Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection, “minority” does not have merely numerical denotation but refers to identifiable and specially disadvantaged group. Graves v. Barnes, D.C.Tex., 343 F.Supp. 704, 730

COLORED. Colored (or coloured) is a racial descriptor historically used in the United States during the Jim Crow era to refer to an African American. In many places, it may be considered a slur. It has taken on a different meaning in Southern Africa referring to a person of mixed or Cape Coloured heritage.

According to Wikipedia: “In the United States, colored was the predominant and preferred term for African Americans in the mid- to late nineteenth century in part because it was accepted by both white and black Americans as more inclusive, covering those of mixed-race ancestry (and, less commonly, Asian Americans and other racial minorities), as well as those who were considered to have “complete Black ancestry”.^[7] They did not think of themselves as or accept the label African, did not want whites pressuring them to relocate to a colony in Africa, and said they were no more African than white Americans were European. In place of “African” they preferred the term colored, or the more learned and precise Negro.^[8] However, the term Negro later fell from favor following the Civil Rights Movement as it was seen as imposed upon the community it described by white people during slavery, and carried connotations of subservience. The term black was preferred during the 1960s by the Black Power movement, as well as radical black nationalists (the Black Muslims and the Black Panthers), pan-Africanists (Stokely Carmichael, leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee) and political progressives. “Negro” was still favored as self-descriptive racial term over “black” by a plurality in the late 1960s; however, by the late 1970s and early 1980s, “black” was strongly favored.^[7]

The term “colored” goes hand in hand with the the phrase “color of law” describes a situation where someone, often a government official, acts in a way that appears to be authorized by law, but is actually a violation of the law or a misuse of power. 

ALIEN. Alien is a legal term that refers to any person who is not a citizen or a national of the United States, as listed in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). There are different categories of aliens: resident and nonresident, immigrant and nonimmigrant, asylee and refugee, documented and undocumented.

According to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an alien is an individual who does not have U.S. citizenship and is not a U.S. national. The INA defines a national of the United States as one who, while not a citizen, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. One owes personal allegiance to the United States if that person has taken an oath of naturalization .

The Spirit of the Law

“Let me tell you about blackness. Grits and cornbread how could you act this?”

Brother J. – X CLAN

The facts presented above are by no means a denial or a negation of my (admittedly artificial) identity as a Black man living in the United States of America, quite the contrary. While it is very true that Black is not a nationality, it is also not a race, and it does represent a grammatical and semantic curse, but still, there is something about blackness. What is it then? I do not yet have the words to articulate what I know in my heart to be true, but I believe that real black folk have the god-like power to change what is meant for evil into something good, and I put that on everything. Ase’

Books About Indigenous Americans

• An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz
• SOMEBODY’S BEEN LYING: A Great American Deception by Anthony Rashaud Poet Coe
• Jacksonland: President Andrew Jackson, Cherokee Chief John Ross, and a Great American Land Grab by Steve Inskeep 
• 19 White Men Who Admitted There Were Indigenous Black People In The Americas by Chase Jacoby McGhee
• The First Americans Were Africans: Expanded and Revised by Dr. David Imhotep
• An Afro-Indigenous History of the United States by Kyle T. Mays
• Black People are Indigenous to the Americas: Research Material for the Inquisitive by Kimberly R Norton
• Revealing America’s Dark Skinned Past: The Columbian Era (Vol) Paperback by RedSilver Fox Thunderbird
• They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America by Ivan Van Sertima
• When The World Was Black: The Untold History of the World’s First Civilizations, Part One: Prehistoric Cultures by Supreme Understanding
• History and Culture of the Black Aboriginals of Americans by Dr. Clyde Winters
• Black Indians: A Hidden Heritage by William Loren Katz
• American History Lied We Are Not Black Dispelling the Misconception by Truth Ali (Author), Bro. Jahlael Bey (Author), Maati Ali (Editor), Earl Johnson (Editor)
• American Indian Wars: A Captivating Guide to a Series of Conflicts That Occurred in North America and How They Impacted Native American Tribes by Captivating History
• The World History of the Black Race by Dr. Clyde Winters
• Jacksonland: President Andrew Jackson, Cherokee Chief John Ross, and a Great American Land Grab by Steve Inskeep
• The Historical Atlas of Native Americans: 150 maps chronicle the fascinating and tragic story of North America’s Indigenous Peoples by Ian Barnes
• 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus by Charles C Mann
• The Plot Against Native America: The Fateful Story of Native American Boarding Schools and the Theft of Tribal Lands by Bill Vaughn
• Encyclopedia of Native American Tribes (Facts on File Library of American History) by Carl Waldman
• Voices of Cherokee Women (Real Voices, Real History) by Carolyn Ross Johnston
• The Hopi Survival Kit: The Prophecies, Instructions and Warnings Revealed by the Last Elders by Thomas E. Mails

• ShareCopied to clipboard
• Facebook
• Mail
• Reddit