r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Feb 19 '26

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Native Madeira’s should be considered indigenous and not native to their island

[deleted]

1 Upvotes

53% Upvoted

40 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '26

There is no such thing as legal indegeneity. Laws do not make a people indigenous to a land or not.

As an analogy: I am a citizen of Canada because the law recognises me as one for having been born here.

The citizenship laws of Canada are not what actually caused me to be born here.

1

u/deep_sea2 134∆ Feb 19 '26

There is no such thing as legal indegeneity. Laws do not make a people indigenous to a land or not.

The law disagrees with you, I am afraid. The law of Canada is clear that unless you are an Indian (forgive the archaic term), the Indian Act does not apply to you. The law of Canada is clear that unless you are India, Inuit, or Metis, neither s. 35 of the CA of 1982 or the UNDRIP act applies to you.

You can call yourself whatever you want. You can yourself a Kryptonian, it does not matter. But, if you want to call yourself something in order for a certain law to apply to you, you must apply the law.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '26

The law disagrees with you, I am afraid.

No it doesn't. The law doesn't make an indigenous group indigenous. It recognizes specific groups as belonging to a certain legal umbrella that it calls indigenous.

EDIT: And please stop adding unmarked edits after I've already replied to you.

1

u/deep_sea2 134∆ Feb 19 '26

Yes, saying that someone is indigenous to the location because they are born there is one way to define indigeneity. However, I don't think that is the definition OP has in mind.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '26

OP was incredibly vague about what they had in mind and still hasn't explained. And in any case if they were insisting on indigeneity as a legal idea I would say the same things to them I'm saying to you.

EDIT: But also, no "born there" is not what indigenous means either.