Can people be indigenous to a country because they colonised that country first?

Question

They may have migrated from another land 50,000 years ago. Does that make them indigenous?

Answer 1

If you want to go back to the beginning then WE ARE ALL Africans!

Human life started on the African continent, migrating into what we know as Asia, and then up (following the food source) into what we know as Russia.

Along the way the exposure to different intensities of sun caused the "splitting off" of the different racial norms--from negroid came mongoloid and then finally caucasian. (And doesn't that idea just make a white supremesist cringe!)

From there the "people" spread out through Europe and into the English islands in waves of immigrant and conqueror that go back 10s of thousands of years. The groups who had migrated earlier always being pushed farther West by the new conquerors from the tribes of the East behind.

In the meantime, several bands of mongoloid peoples being pushed by the wars for land behind them, migrated to the east over the existing land bridge between (the now) Russian continent and Alaska gradually drifting south to populate the whole of North America and South America over thousands of years.

These are the people we think of now as "indigenous". Does their people having lived free in this land for thousands of years entitle them to ownership for eternity? I think not. Because if we were to return to the very beginning, these lands belonged to the immense wild herds of animals and not man. Man was a rather late arrival in the evolutionary sense.

Maybe all of us should be returned to Africa, where ALL of our ancestors started from!

In the end, what really matters is what Edgar 9391 has already said quite well. It only matters that we all learn to get along.

Answer 2

Hmmm...difficult question...but I think I see what you're getting at. I think an indigenous person could be classified as whoever lived there since the beginning (of time, of creation, of whatever, etc.). Even though they may have migrated 50,000 years ago doesn't mean they're indigenous. It's like the American Revolution era - lots of people from Europe, Africa, etc. ended up living in North America, and there are still people who still live in the U.S. and can trace their roots back 400 years. So if those people aren't considered indigenous to North America, then why should the people who migrated earlier be any different?

Answer 3

Yes.
Europeans are considered indigenous to Europe, but they are actually descendants of a nomadic people living in the Lower Volga River.
East Asians are considered indigenous to East Asia, but they are actually descendants of a wandering people living in Central Asia.
Pacific Islanders are considered indigenous to Pacific Islands, but they are actually descendants of a seafaring people living in the Philippines and Indonesia.

Ultimately, every human is a descendant of a person from another aldn - in the Middle East.

Answer 4

Yes, if they were the first people who inhabited the area, or so says modern definition. Tahitians are considered indigenous people, yet their ancestors migrated from New Zealand.

Answer 5

indigenous......born or engendered in, native to a land or region, especially before an intrusion, especially of plants and indigenous peoples.

I suppose you can draw your own conclusions from this definition.

Answer 6

It is a very, very complex debate. In the end, I want people to be treated equally. That means I don't care who got where first and how outside of historical curiosity, for we must learn to get along or suffer the consequences.

Answer 7

My attitude is the earth is humanities and people need to share it or suffer the inherent consequences . Rascism just does get it .
peace we are all indigenous beings to this planet .

Answer 8

I don't think the issue is one of who got there first? The debate is about how one colonises or acquires the land.

At the end of the day......."We're all fleas on a dogs back" Who owns the dog?

Answer 9

hmm...

it seems like most indigenous people look darker or have sort of slanted/almond eyes you know, but I don't know if this is true for all people labeled as "indigenous".