Distinction between First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples, and the reason for it [on hold]





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







-1















I'm having some trouble understanding the purpose of the distinction between First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples. I understand that First Nations are considered "Indians" (which I know isn't proper), and that Metis and Inuit people are not. I understand that Aboriginals refers to all 3 groups. What I don't understand is why this distinction exists, and I'm hoping that someone will be able to clarify.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by JJJ, Azor Ahai, Mitch, TrevorD, kiamlaluno Apr 3 at 15:23


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – JJJ, Azor Ahai, TrevorD, kiamlaluno

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

















  • Hi Paul. Have you tried looking up these terms in a dictionary? If you have, can you tell us what you found and why that's confusing?

    – Juhasz
    Apr 1 at 17:51











  • I don't understand why the Inuit and Metis are excluded from the term "First Nations". I understand the definitions. All it says about First Nations is that they're generally thought to exclude the Inuit and Metis

    – Paul
    Apr 2 at 15:29











  • I'm going to write an answer, because I find the topic interesting, but I encourage you to look at "How do I ask a good question?" and other similar resources on this site. The key point is that in order to provide a good answer, we need to know exactly what you're asking. This generally means we need context, including your current understanding of the issue. For instance, "I found this definition of First Nations and this definition of Inuit and it appears that they overlap..."

    – Juhasz
    Apr 2 at 17:08











  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on History.SE.

    – Mitch
    Apr 2 at 22:42


















-1















I'm having some trouble understanding the purpose of the distinction between First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples. I understand that First Nations are considered "Indians" (which I know isn't proper), and that Metis and Inuit people are not. I understand that Aboriginals refers to all 3 groups. What I don't understand is why this distinction exists, and I'm hoping that someone will be able to clarify.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by JJJ, Azor Ahai, Mitch, TrevorD, kiamlaluno Apr 3 at 15:23


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – JJJ, Azor Ahai, TrevorD, kiamlaluno

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

















  • Hi Paul. Have you tried looking up these terms in a dictionary? If you have, can you tell us what you found and why that's confusing?

    – Juhasz
    Apr 1 at 17:51











  • I don't understand why the Inuit and Metis are excluded from the term "First Nations". I understand the definitions. All it says about First Nations is that they're generally thought to exclude the Inuit and Metis

    – Paul
    Apr 2 at 15:29











  • I'm going to write an answer, because I find the topic interesting, but I encourage you to look at "How do I ask a good question?" and other similar resources on this site. The key point is that in order to provide a good answer, we need to know exactly what you're asking. This generally means we need context, including your current understanding of the issue. For instance, "I found this definition of First Nations and this definition of Inuit and it appears that they overlap..."

    – Juhasz
    Apr 2 at 17:08











  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on History.SE.

    – Mitch
    Apr 2 at 22:42














-1












-1








-1








I'm having some trouble understanding the purpose of the distinction between First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples. I understand that First Nations are considered "Indians" (which I know isn't proper), and that Metis and Inuit people are not. I understand that Aboriginals refers to all 3 groups. What I don't understand is why this distinction exists, and I'm hoping that someone will be able to clarify.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












I'm having some trouble understanding the purpose of the distinction between First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples. I understand that First Nations are considered "Indians" (which I know isn't proper), and that Metis and Inuit people are not. I understand that Aboriginals refers to all 3 groups. What I don't understand is why this distinction exists, and I'm hoping that someone will be able to clarify.







differences






share|improve this question







New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked Apr 1 at 17:38









PaulPaul

1




1




New contributor




Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Paul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




put on hold as off-topic by JJJ, Azor Ahai, Mitch, TrevorD, kiamlaluno Apr 3 at 15:23


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – JJJ, Azor Ahai, TrevorD, kiamlaluno

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.







put on hold as off-topic by JJJ, Azor Ahai, Mitch, TrevorD, kiamlaluno Apr 3 at 15:23


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – JJJ, Azor Ahai, TrevorD, kiamlaluno

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • Hi Paul. Have you tried looking up these terms in a dictionary? If you have, can you tell us what you found and why that's confusing?

    – Juhasz
    Apr 1 at 17:51











  • I don't understand why the Inuit and Metis are excluded from the term "First Nations". I understand the definitions. All it says about First Nations is that they're generally thought to exclude the Inuit and Metis

    – Paul
    Apr 2 at 15:29











  • I'm going to write an answer, because I find the topic interesting, but I encourage you to look at "How do I ask a good question?" and other similar resources on this site. The key point is that in order to provide a good answer, we need to know exactly what you're asking. This generally means we need context, including your current understanding of the issue. For instance, "I found this definition of First Nations and this definition of Inuit and it appears that they overlap..."

    – Juhasz
    Apr 2 at 17:08











  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on History.SE.

    – Mitch
    Apr 2 at 22:42



















  • Hi Paul. Have you tried looking up these terms in a dictionary? If you have, can you tell us what you found and why that's confusing?

    – Juhasz
    Apr 1 at 17:51











  • I don't understand why the Inuit and Metis are excluded from the term "First Nations". I understand the definitions. All it says about First Nations is that they're generally thought to exclude the Inuit and Metis

    – Paul
    Apr 2 at 15:29











  • I'm going to write an answer, because I find the topic interesting, but I encourage you to look at "How do I ask a good question?" and other similar resources on this site. The key point is that in order to provide a good answer, we need to know exactly what you're asking. This generally means we need context, including your current understanding of the issue. For instance, "I found this definition of First Nations and this definition of Inuit and it appears that they overlap..."

    – Juhasz
    Apr 2 at 17:08











  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on History.SE.

    – Mitch
    Apr 2 at 22:42

















Hi Paul. Have you tried looking up these terms in a dictionary? If you have, can you tell us what you found and why that's confusing?

– Juhasz
Apr 1 at 17:51





Hi Paul. Have you tried looking up these terms in a dictionary? If you have, can you tell us what you found and why that's confusing?

– Juhasz
Apr 1 at 17:51













I don't understand why the Inuit and Metis are excluded from the term "First Nations". I understand the definitions. All it says about First Nations is that they're generally thought to exclude the Inuit and Metis

– Paul
Apr 2 at 15:29





I don't understand why the Inuit and Metis are excluded from the term "First Nations". I understand the definitions. All it says about First Nations is that they're generally thought to exclude the Inuit and Metis

– Paul
Apr 2 at 15:29













I'm going to write an answer, because I find the topic interesting, but I encourage you to look at "How do I ask a good question?" and other similar resources on this site. The key point is that in order to provide a good answer, we need to know exactly what you're asking. This generally means we need context, including your current understanding of the issue. For instance, "I found this definition of First Nations and this definition of Inuit and it appears that they overlap..."

– Juhasz
Apr 2 at 17:08





I'm going to write an answer, because I find the topic interesting, but I encourage you to look at "How do I ask a good question?" and other similar resources on this site. The key point is that in order to provide a good answer, we need to know exactly what you're asking. This generally means we need context, including your current understanding of the issue. For instance, "I found this definition of First Nations and this definition of Inuit and it appears that they overlap..."

– Juhasz
Apr 2 at 17:08













I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on History.SE.

– Mitch
Apr 2 at 22:42





I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on History.SE.

– Mitch
Apr 2 at 22:42










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5














First Nation, Inuit and Métis are all ethnic designations and ethnic designations are always political. Which individuals are allowed to claim membership in a group is usually not obvious, not consistent, and not logical.



The very short answer is that there are some important distinctions between First Nations, Inuits and Métis and in some contexts, it's important to highlight this distinction. These distinctions aren't really relevant to a discussion of the English language, but, briefly:



The Inuit are descended from people who migrated from Siberia significantly later, they speak languages that are very distinct, inhabit areas in the extreme north of the continent and are by far the majority in those areas (the population of Nunavut is 83% Inuit, 0.4% First Nations, 0.5% Métis and 15% non-aboriginal)



Métis has two meanings: either people with mixed indigenous and non-indigenous parentage or a distinct group of such bi-racial people who traditionally lived in central Canada and who married within their own group, creating a distinct culture. This group has a distinct history and legal position in Canada.



First Nations are all the other indigenous peoples of Canada (and some tribes living in the present-day United States use this term as well). Yes, they are ethnically, linguistically and culturally diverse, but they are arguably more similar to each other than they are to the Métis or Inuit people.



These groups could, in some contexts, all be considered aboriginal, indigenous, Indian, first people, native, etc. Because of the troubled history of colonialism, all of these terms have political significance and can be used to slightly different effect.






share|improve this answer
































    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5














    First Nation, Inuit and Métis are all ethnic designations and ethnic designations are always political. Which individuals are allowed to claim membership in a group is usually not obvious, not consistent, and not logical.



    The very short answer is that there are some important distinctions between First Nations, Inuits and Métis and in some contexts, it's important to highlight this distinction. These distinctions aren't really relevant to a discussion of the English language, but, briefly:



    The Inuit are descended from people who migrated from Siberia significantly later, they speak languages that are very distinct, inhabit areas in the extreme north of the continent and are by far the majority in those areas (the population of Nunavut is 83% Inuit, 0.4% First Nations, 0.5% Métis and 15% non-aboriginal)



    Métis has two meanings: either people with mixed indigenous and non-indigenous parentage or a distinct group of such bi-racial people who traditionally lived in central Canada and who married within their own group, creating a distinct culture. This group has a distinct history and legal position in Canada.



    First Nations are all the other indigenous peoples of Canada (and some tribes living in the present-day United States use this term as well). Yes, they are ethnically, linguistically and culturally diverse, but they are arguably more similar to each other than they are to the Métis or Inuit people.



    These groups could, in some contexts, all be considered aboriginal, indigenous, Indian, first people, native, etc. Because of the troubled history of colonialism, all of these terms have political significance and can be used to slightly different effect.






    share|improve this answer






























      5














      First Nation, Inuit and Métis are all ethnic designations and ethnic designations are always political. Which individuals are allowed to claim membership in a group is usually not obvious, not consistent, and not logical.



      The very short answer is that there are some important distinctions between First Nations, Inuits and Métis and in some contexts, it's important to highlight this distinction. These distinctions aren't really relevant to a discussion of the English language, but, briefly:



      The Inuit are descended from people who migrated from Siberia significantly later, they speak languages that are very distinct, inhabit areas in the extreme north of the continent and are by far the majority in those areas (the population of Nunavut is 83% Inuit, 0.4% First Nations, 0.5% Métis and 15% non-aboriginal)



      Métis has two meanings: either people with mixed indigenous and non-indigenous parentage or a distinct group of such bi-racial people who traditionally lived in central Canada and who married within their own group, creating a distinct culture. This group has a distinct history and legal position in Canada.



      First Nations are all the other indigenous peoples of Canada (and some tribes living in the present-day United States use this term as well). Yes, they are ethnically, linguistically and culturally diverse, but they are arguably more similar to each other than they are to the Métis or Inuit people.



      These groups could, in some contexts, all be considered aboriginal, indigenous, Indian, first people, native, etc. Because of the troubled history of colonialism, all of these terms have political significance and can be used to slightly different effect.






      share|improve this answer




























        5












        5








        5







        First Nation, Inuit and Métis are all ethnic designations and ethnic designations are always political. Which individuals are allowed to claim membership in a group is usually not obvious, not consistent, and not logical.



        The very short answer is that there are some important distinctions between First Nations, Inuits and Métis and in some contexts, it's important to highlight this distinction. These distinctions aren't really relevant to a discussion of the English language, but, briefly:



        The Inuit are descended from people who migrated from Siberia significantly later, they speak languages that are very distinct, inhabit areas in the extreme north of the continent and are by far the majority in those areas (the population of Nunavut is 83% Inuit, 0.4% First Nations, 0.5% Métis and 15% non-aboriginal)



        Métis has two meanings: either people with mixed indigenous and non-indigenous parentage or a distinct group of such bi-racial people who traditionally lived in central Canada and who married within their own group, creating a distinct culture. This group has a distinct history and legal position in Canada.



        First Nations are all the other indigenous peoples of Canada (and some tribes living in the present-day United States use this term as well). Yes, they are ethnically, linguistically and culturally diverse, but they are arguably more similar to each other than they are to the Métis or Inuit people.



        These groups could, in some contexts, all be considered aboriginal, indigenous, Indian, first people, native, etc. Because of the troubled history of colonialism, all of these terms have political significance and can be used to slightly different effect.






        share|improve this answer















        First Nation, Inuit and Métis are all ethnic designations and ethnic designations are always political. Which individuals are allowed to claim membership in a group is usually not obvious, not consistent, and not logical.



        The very short answer is that there are some important distinctions between First Nations, Inuits and Métis and in some contexts, it's important to highlight this distinction. These distinctions aren't really relevant to a discussion of the English language, but, briefly:



        The Inuit are descended from people who migrated from Siberia significantly later, they speak languages that are very distinct, inhabit areas in the extreme north of the continent and are by far the majority in those areas (the population of Nunavut is 83% Inuit, 0.4% First Nations, 0.5% Métis and 15% non-aboriginal)



        Métis has two meanings: either people with mixed indigenous and non-indigenous parentage or a distinct group of such bi-racial people who traditionally lived in central Canada and who married within their own group, creating a distinct culture. This group has a distinct history and legal position in Canada.



        First Nations are all the other indigenous peoples of Canada (and some tribes living in the present-day United States use this term as well). Yes, they are ethnically, linguistically and culturally diverse, but they are arguably more similar to each other than they are to the Métis or Inuit people.



        These groups could, in some contexts, all be considered aboriginal, indigenous, Indian, first people, native, etc. Because of the troubled history of colonialism, all of these terms have political significance and can be used to slightly different effect.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited Apr 3 at 2:44

























        answered Apr 2 at 21:25









        JuhaszJuhasz

        3,2781814




        3,2781814















            Popular posts from this blog

            Bruad Bilen | Luke uk diar | NawigatsjuunCommonskategorii: BruadCommonskategorii: RunstükenWikiquote: Bruad

            What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

            Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029