The current version of political correctness continues to get hyperventilated about the use of words. To the now legally-enforced prohibition on the “N-word” and government-mandated suppression of words like “squaw” we have seemingly cultural rejection of words like “master” (as in “master bedroom” or “master switch”). Any sports or mascot reference to an AmerInd tribal moniker is verboten, even when the tribes involved consider it an honor to them and their heritage. And the very term “American Indian” or AmerInd is forcibly being replaced by mandated “Native American” or worse, “Indigenous People.” Terms often despised by those to whom it is applied. (As we’ve pointed out now and then in these commentaries.)

Colonialism? Imperialism? Capitalism?

The “reasons” (excuses?) for this language-policing include cultural appropriation, racism, white supremacy, and the critical need to overcome the evils of colonialism. And of course, that enemy of free speech: the idea that nothing should ever be said or written that might offend someone. (At least, someone who is identified as being in a protected class.)

I was reminded that George Washington University – the main campus is within a throwing-rock distance of the White House – renamed its sports teams from “Colonials” to “Revolutionaries” a few months back, because of a “community disagreement” over the old nickname.

Apparently, the school’s governing board, president, faculty, staff, students, and alumni forgot that “Colonials” was the name of the armies led by Washington and others to fight AGAINST British colonial rule. Apparently today the c-word (however used) is as bad as the n-word and far less objectionable than the f-word. (And of course, we note the incredible lack of education on the part of university students, faculty, and administrators – as proven in the case of now-former Harvard President Gay.)

This entire foofarah over “colonials” came up because the university (despite having a very large percentage of Jewish faculty and students) has come out firmly in support of Hamas and its imaginary homeland of Palestine, which is fighting against the evil colonialism of Jews. As did the firing of Gay. Who apparently says that objecting to plagiarism is “racist.” Which is even worse than colonialism.

A detailed example of colonial names

And in fact, if we are looking at objectionable, offensive names involved with colonialism, let us look at one in the news right now. Palestine. For more than two centuries, that name has been applied almost exclusively to the region which now includes the nations of Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt – or parts thereof. And to the regions commonly called the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

How ironic!

Few geographical names have a greater history of association with colonialism. Dating back more than 3,000 years, in fact.

The name exists because of bigoted, hateful, colonial powers over centuries.

The oldest known name for the region stretching along the Eastern Mediterranean coastline from the Lebanon Mountains (Phoenicia) to the frontier of Egypt was Canaan. Canaan apparently included both the land between the Mediterranean and the River Jordan and those areas immediately east of the Jordan to the edge of the desert. And portions, if not all, of what today is Lebanon: the people of Tyre, Byblos, Sidon were apparently of one or more of the many tribes called Canaanites.

Canaan has always been a vital area of control for commerce and military control: both the “big” empires and little countries (even some called “empires”) have fought over it for at least 4,000 years.

It is in essence the landbridge between Asia and Africa, and between the Mediterranean and Red Seas, which in turn connect to the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. A very valuable piece of property.

Moreover, even though Israel was created by a large Jewish migration, it was an ancestral homeland in which Jews had lived throughout history. That is not something that can be said of the Anglo arrival in Australia and New Zealand, or of the Iberian invasion of Central and South America, or many more. It is also not something that can be said of the 7th-century Arabian invasion of the Levant—which includes the Holy Land—as part of the Islamic expansion in the Arab-Byzantine wars.

It was known as Canaan for perhaps 2,000 to 3,000 years. First as a whole bunch of tiny city-states, then of tribal lands and finally mostly under a unified Kingdom of Israel for 120 or so years. That broke up when the north seceded (yet continues to be called the Kingdom of Israel by historians). And the rump became known as the Kingdom of Judah.

It was the home of a people called the Hebrews: descendants of a man (Abram) from Mesopotamia, perhaps fleeing tyranny himself, who settled there about 2000 BC, and among other things, raised and led an army to defend his neighbors in Canaan against a raid by a coalition of Mesopotamian kings. At first, welcomed, the growing clan was enslaved. Abram was obviously a migrant but by the fourth generation, were no doubt considered “locals” if still “newcomers” by the others in Canaan.

After a couple of centuries or so, half of the clan migrated to Egypt fleeing “poor economic conditions” (a famine). This was Jacob, also called Israel, and his twelve sons and a daughter and their families. (Jacob’s brother Esau and his family stayed in Canaan.)

During the 400 years this clan grew into a nation of 2 million people in Egypt, people called the Philistines, also known as “Sea People” invaded (colonized) a strip of the coast of Canaan, which became known as Philistia. This colony of five major cities (which included both Gaza and the now-Israeli city of Ashdod) was to have a major impact in Canaan. But never occupied the entire region,

We will pick this history (and language) lesson in a second part.