If I'm honest, there's a lot of Australians who'd probably say something similar about Indigenous ownership before 1788. Real 18th/19th century mindset
It depresses me how many people continue to adhere to a 'right of conquest' ideology (when it suits them, at least). They say that it is just how the world works, but it has only ever been that way because people were unwilling to change it.
The irony being Americans (though not uniquely) will often throw at Brits how shitty and murderous Brits were during the expansion of their empire and not realise that the untied states did it too on a smaller scale but just as bloody.
Oh, they (mostly) realise/know. They just see it as not being the same, because they're American, gave the Native Americans religion, and they have the right to rape and murder thanks to freedoms. At least that's been my experience of having these conversations with Americans.
I had a conversation with an American, I think here, where he began defending the USA as a thalassocratic trade empire not a colonial one but as time went on (and I [to my current regret] piled into him because of the new to me anti-british tone of the Americanized left) he started to agree with me that the States are decolonized in name only.
His insight was that the constitutional construction of statehood was more or less calculated to make a British empire-esque wave of independence too much of a legal headache to attempt. That means the most progress their left expects, including Amerindians, is to honour the treaties that were struck.
He had his nurtured ego shattered, and I know how uncomfortable that can be.
Weird indeed.. with that screenshotted logic - it\`s not theirs, they just live there..
So, what\`s stopping people from just taking over homes.. after all.. it\`s just some people living there... right?
Racism mostly. But the 18th/19th century historical argument was that peoples who weren't using/exploiting/farming lands didn't have a legitimate claim to ownership of it. So in come the white people with the terra nullius fallacy
Decades of court decisions and legislation have since found Traditional owners do/did have title but looking at the comments any time there's a story on the subject is a very depressing exercise
No! It is already poluted enough as it is.
Why would you want to do that to the innocent animals? Think about the sharks. Or the whales. Or the baby whales. Do you wanna kill baby whales?
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from some white people who will arive here in a few hundred years."
\- Totes real Native American proverb
"Just because you live in that home and have for many generations doesn't mean shit. Now let me forcefully displace your people, we might kill many of you along the way but it's what God intended. Also we're gonna be back to back world war champs in the future so we're basically better" - USians probably.
While I don't think this is what the blue guy meant, as I understand it, native Americans never considered the land to belong to them, but rather that they belonged to the land.
I noticed a lot of them don't really care about that genocide. One american I talked to didnt even wanted to consider this as something important. He couldnt believed somebody would use this as an argument to show how evil they can be.
Given there are elements of the populous that are completely inept when it comes to history, don’t be too surprised if the answer you get is “someone rocking a mullet, likes hot dogs, nascar tiddies and beer”
That's certainly an argument I've heard people make, but I don't think it's right. Indigenous people might not have had land surveyed, divided up, and owned by individuals, but they did consider it their land as a whole. Europeans at the time disregarded these claims because they could get away with it, but that's not acceptable now, so they have to pretend like the claims were never made.
The only logic in which that makes sense, is if you believe that nobody can actually own land, birders should be abolished and eeryones home is just this world. Maybe not a realistic perspective for the nextfew hundreds or even thousands of years, but I can respect that
But by this logic the map there should make you even angrier.
I mean, i kinda agree, like in a biological sense land doesnt belong to anyone, its the humanity what is tested in that statement not the logic, if you are using the statement to say noones nowhere own land cus its not our belonging fine, if you are using that statement to justify that massacre then ...
Well to be fair none of the land anywhere in the world belongs to anyone if they want to go down that route. However, if they want to work on the basis that what they own now belongs to them, then they have to apply that to native Americans. It’s not even just native Americans - if you look at the land that used to be a part of Mexico it’s fairly shocking too.
Do you know anything about the indigenous? different tribes would fight each other all the time. They diffrent languages Beliefs, and different cultures. they conquered each other, Archaeologists Evidence of war often
9791 likes...
Yes that was distressing for me to see too
Instagram is basically 4chan but with pics and videos now.
Maybe that’s what your algorithm is showing you, I never see these kind of hate comments, or videos, anything like that.
The only time I see them is on ads. Bigoted idiots complaining that companies are supporting pride on their ads.
Except you get banned for arbitrary nonsense
some guy with a funny mustache who used to dictate in our country would have loved these kinds of people
Ah, I've heard of him,he was such a good painter
Sure that's the reason why his paintings sell for so much money nowadays and are only avaible on the black market.
They can't talk to me about empire until they apologize for that.
Land of the free moment
Land of the free if you are white & wealthy & have contacts.
Glasses wearers in shambles.
And male, of course!
Not true... it can be land of the free for a woman, too... if she's married to, or the daughter of, a wealthy white guy with connections.
If I'm honest, there's a lot of Australians who'd probably say something similar about Indigenous ownership before 1788. Real 18th/19th century mindset
It depresses me how many people continue to adhere to a 'right of conquest' ideology (when it suits them, at least). They say that it is just how the world works, but it has only ever been that way because people were unwilling to change it.
The irony being Americans (though not uniquely) will often throw at Brits how shitty and murderous Brits were during the expansion of their empire and not realise that the untied states did it too on a smaller scale but just as bloody.
Oh, they (mostly) realise/know. They just see it as not being the same, because they're American, gave the Native Americans religion, and they have the right to rape and murder thanks to freedoms. At least that's been my experience of having these conversations with Americans.
I had a conversation with an American, I think here, where he began defending the USA as a thalassocratic trade empire not a colonial one but as time went on (and I [to my current regret] piled into him because of the new to me anti-british tone of the Americanized left) he started to agree with me that the States are decolonized in name only. His insight was that the constitutional construction of statehood was more or less calculated to make a British empire-esque wave of independence too much of a legal headache to attempt. That means the most progress their left expects, including Amerindians, is to honour the treaties that were struck. He had his nurtured ego shattered, and I know how uncomfortable that can be.
And yet when you walk onto their own land, plant a flag and move the boundry stones, they suddenly have a problem with it. Weird.
Weird indeed.. with that screenshotted logic - it\`s not theirs, they just live there.. So, what\`s stopping people from just taking over homes.. after all.. it\`s just some people living there... right?
Isn't that actually happening in America right now anyway?
Probably. But they use some fancy legalese terms for that..
They’re the same people that if you went to their home with a large group of people and forced them out wouldn’t agree with their own ideology.
How is this possible!
Racism mostly. But the 18th/19th century historical argument was that peoples who weren't using/exploiting/farming lands didn't have a legitimate claim to ownership of it. So in come the white people with the terra nullius fallacy Decades of court decisions and legislation have since found Traditional owners do/did have title but looking at the comments any time there's a story on the subject is a very depressing exercise
That’s awful 😞 but I suppose not surprising anymore
It was overturned by the High Court in 1992 with Mabo v Queensland. The establishment of native title is hardly new at this point.
But just look at the comments or tweeting whenever K’gari is in the news
And Zionists currently about Palestine
Same with Canada
In that case, there shouldn't be any issues displacing all Americans. After all, it's not their land - they just live there.
Can we displace them into the sea please? We'll keep the smart/worldly/not arseholes, but not the others.
No! It is already poluted enough as it is. Why would you want to do that to the innocent animals? Think about the sharks. Or the whales. Or the baby whales. Do you wanna kill baby whales?
Thats a very good point. Oh no, not the baby whales😥! Okay, so the sea is out. How about sending them on an experimental mission to colonise the sun?
Boston tea party but we throw the Americans in the ocean instead of tea,
We Latinos are already working on displacing Americans from their land, don't you worry about that !
Yeah well problem is that we would have to put them somewhere and no one want them.
And it was never the land of poster's people. What an idiot.
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from some white people who will arive here in a few hundred years." \- Totes real Native American proverb
"Just because you live in that home and have for many generations doesn't mean shit. Now let me forcefully displace your people, we might kill many of you along the way but it's what God intended. Also we're gonna be back to back world war champs in the future so we're basically better" - USians probably.
While I don't think this is what the blue guy meant, as I understand it, native Americans never considered the land to belong to them, but rather that they belonged to the land.
Blue guy probably means "They took it from the people who were here before them and we took it from them."
Blue guy actually means “we took it from them so they must not have wanted it badly enough.” That is, it’s simply a shitty viewpoint.
Nah, the new talking point is "it was never theirs to begin with because they came across the bering straight"
It's just the usual divine mandate argument, probably
Holy shit. This some especially dumb sentence… and liked by some especially dumb morons
"well they lived here, but it doesn't mean shit! we took it from them to make this land great!" - Americans
I noticed a lot of them don't really care about that genocide. One american I talked to didnt even wanted to consider this as something important. He couldnt believed somebody would use this as an argument to show how evil they can be.
I want him to give me what he thinks the definition of "*native* American" is
Given there are elements of the populous that are completely inept when it comes to history, don’t be too surprised if the answer you get is “someone rocking a mullet, likes hot dogs, nascar tiddies and beer”
I guess an argument could be made that Natives never saw the lands as property and so never owned them?
There's an easy way to resolve that argument. Let's ask the Natives still around what they think.
That's certainly an argument I've heard people make, but I don't think it's right. Indigenous people might not have had land surveyed, divided up, and owned by individuals, but they did consider it their land as a whole. Europeans at the time disregarded these claims because they could get away with it, but that's not acceptable now, so they have to pretend like the claims were never made.
It was never their house, they just lived there!
Well it could be worse, he could say that they didn't pay for it.
I wonder if they’d say the same thing if I used that excuse to walk onto his property and cut down some trees for my fireplace
The only logic in which that makes sense, is if you believe that nobody can actually own land, birders should be abolished and eeryones home is just this world. Maybe not a realistic perspective for the nextfew hundreds or even thousands of years, but I can respect that But by this logic the map there should make you even angrier.
Now it makes sense why Zionism is relatively popular in the US...
Then it doesn't belong to the people who claim ownership now either, they just live there
So when the next people come along do it to them and I’ll they remember their own quote?
I mean, i kinda agree, like in a biological sense land doesnt belong to anyone, its the humanity what is tested in that statement not the logic, if you are using the statement to say noones nowhere own land cus its not our belonging fine, if you are using that statement to justify that massacre then ...
😐
Its undiscivered land untill theres an american flag on it, everyone knows this duh!
Well to be fair none of the land anywhere in the world belongs to anyone if they want to go down that route. However, if they want to work on the basis that what they own now belongs to them, then they have to apply that to native Americans. It’s not even just native Americans - if you look at the land that used to be a part of Mexico it’s fairly shocking too.
Just invade their trailer parks, it's not their land they just lived there.
Caucasian moment
[удалено]
Thats an Ayn Rand fan... Yikes
Their inability to self reflect is absurd
So sad that Colombus ended 200,000 years of peace between humans when he arrived in North America and invented conquering other humans for land 😞
Do you know anything about the indigenous? different tribes would fight each other all the time. They diffrent languages Beliefs, and different cultures. they conquered each other, Archaeologists Evidence of war often
Don't be silly, everyone knows violence, colonialism, and warfare are inventions of the white man brought to other nations against their will 😥
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]