American Indians and Genocide

[Agnapostate]

This whole thing is just more victimhood crap, oh woe is me.

My family came here in 1685 from Italy but I wasn't here, I didn't do it and I don't care. Right or wrong, we came and we conquered, end of story.

I see. So if it's a matter of having "came and conquered," it no longer constitutes "genocide." Well, on that note, der Führer eroberten Länder für die deutsche Vaterland und Volk!

My wife's maternal side (grandparents) came straight off the reservation in the 1940's and made something of themselves instead of whining about how they were mistreated and crying in their beer.

Yea, Cherokee great-great grandmother and everything, I'm sure. Enthralling. Incidentally, isn't that last line sort of a pejorative ethnic stereotype there? Along the lines of "my wife's maternal side came straight off the plantation in the 1860's and made something of themselves instead of whining about how they were mistreated and crying in their fried chicken and watermelon."

It's interesting that we don't like to talk about the darker actions of the American past. And Don't want to claim any negative history. But when it comes things that were proud of the in the countrys past were quick to claim it as WE. "when WE won WWII" When "We went to the moon" "We are the greatest nation in the world." where we by implication attach our egos to the best of our collective history.

It seems to be a massive epidemic of cognitive dissonance, in that a person can say "I wasn't here, I didn't do it, and I don't care" in one sentence, and "we came and we conquered" in the next. Why not consistently reject the use of possessive pronouns for something that you lack ownership of or influence over?

[Missileman]

I see. So if it's a matter of having "came and conquered," it no longer constitutes "genocide." Well, on that note, der Führer eroberten Länder für die deutsche Vaterland und Volk!



Yea, Cherokee great-great grandmother and everything, I'm sure. Enthralling. Incidentally, isn't that last line sort of a pejorative ethnic stereotype there? Along the lines of "my wife's maternal side came straight off the plantation in the 1860's and made something of themselves instead of whining about how they were mistreated and crying in their fried chicken and watermelon."



It seems to be a massive epidemic of cognitive dissonance, in that a person can say "I wasn't here, I didn't do it, and I don't care" in one sentence, and "we came and we conquered" in the next. Why not consistently reject the use of possessive pronouns for something that you lack ownership of or influence over?

So exactly how many generations do you propose we go back to establish ancestral possession of the land now known as the USA?

[Agnapostate]

So exactly how many generations do you propose we go back to establish ancestral possession of the land now known as the USA?

As the cliche goes, there is not a piece of land in the world that was not stolen at some point in time. The most relevant cases to me seem those where people are currently harmed because of circumstances that pre-dated their births and they had no control over. This is an example of residual distributive injustice. As is generally known here, I consider the solution to be workers' ownership and management of the means of production, which is morally appealing as well as more efficient than capitalism.

[Missileman]

As the cliche goes, there is not a piece of land in the world that was not stolen at some point in time. The most relevant cases to me seem those where people are currently harmed because of circumstances that pre-dated their births and they had no control over. This is an example of residual distributive injustice. As is generally known here, I consider the solution to be workers' ownership and management of the means of production, which is morally appealing as well as more efficient than capitalism.

IOW, it's variable, and YOU establish the time.

[revelarts]

I don't know about "redistributing" anything but I think if Contract law was applied on the contracts and treaties less than one hundred years old there might be some interesting adjustments.

Here in my area there's a treaty on water use in a lake. that boarders a small Reservation. A few years ago a couplee cities/counties discovered that they didn't have enough Water and went to the state and feds to get water rights and to BREAK ANOTHER treaty with the Indians. Part of the plan was to actually flood part of their land as well to increase the size of the new reservoir. ("it wasn't that much land... that would be flooded") thus reducing their land area. I talked to several people who ,INCREDIBLY to me, didn't have a problem with it. "well WE need the water" My old Church was against it and joined in advocating for our counties to do something CRAZY, keeping the freaking treaty. the deal had almost gone through and the Native Americans looked completely politically defeated until some environmental group pointed out a fish that would be endangered by the planned flooding. With that the feds came in and locked down the states/city's plans. Its one of the few times I've been for environmental endangered species regs. But in this case the gov't was more concerned about a FISH than Kicking a people group in the teeth AGAIN.

There are plenty of recent offenses that could be compensated.

[Trigg]

As the cliche goes, there is not a piece of land in the world that was not stolen at some point in time. The most relevant cases to me seem those where people are currently harmed because of circumstances that pre-dated their births and they had no control over. This is an example of residual distributive injustice. As is generally known here, I consider the solution to be workers' ownership and management of the means of production, which is morally appealing as well as more efficient than capitalism.

You can't seem to name a date as to when a person becomes native.

You dismiss anyone who has Indian ancestry as a fake.

Are you advocating for reparations? Because I guarantee you that anyone who can prove Indian ancestry is going to sign up for their "40 acres and a mule". Whether you deem them "real" Indians or not.

Are you claiming to be "currently harmed"?

[Agnapostate]

So are crin63, dmp, DragonStryk72, mrskurtsprincess, and NightTrain going to explain their 'no' votes?

I don't know about "redistributing" anything but I think if Contract law was applied on the contracts and treaties less than one hundred years old there might be some interesting adjustments.

The government obviously does not want it applied; the governments of the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand - British colonies in which the demographics came to be dominated by a white population all - voted against the adoption of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which would provide for compensatory relief.

Here in my area there's a treaty on water use in a lake. that boarders a small Reservation. A few years ago a couplee cities/counties discovered that they didn't have enough Water and went to the state and feds to get water rights and to BREAK ANOTHER treaty with the Indians. Part of the plan was to actually flood part of their land as well to increase the size of the new reservoir. ("it wasn't that much land... that would be flooded") thus reducing their land area. I talked to several people who ,INCREDIBLY to me, didn't have a problem with it. "well WE need the water" My old Church was against it and joined in advocating for our counties to do something CRAZY, keeping the freaking treaty. the deal had almost gone through and the Native Americans looked completely politically defeated until some environmental group pointed out a fish that would be endangered by the planned flooding. With that the feds came in and locked down the states/city's plans. Its one of the few times I've been for environmental endangered species regs. But in this case the gov't was more concerned about a FISH than Kicking a people group in the teeth AGAIN.

There are plenty of recent offenses that could be compensated.

Yes, water rights are a major issue. I'll comment more on that topic when I get home and have access to something I was reading about this.

You can't seem to name a date as to when a person becomes native.

All persons with a degree of Amerindian genetic admixture significant enough to constitute the majority contribution to their phenotype are classified as "Indians" by me. That group includes me. All persons with a degree that influences but does not necessarily dominate their admixture are mixed-bloods, and predominantly European persons are simply whites, in my view. So, in terms of casual analysis, I am an Indian, my maternal grandmother is a mixed-blood, and the maternal cousin of mine that you saw is white.

You dismiss anyone who has Indian ancestry as a fake.

"1/16 Cherokee" whites and their great-great-grandmother princesses are fakes, yes.

Are you advocating for reparations? Because I guarantee you that anyone who can prove Indian ancestry is going to sign up for their "40 acres and a mule". Whether you deem them "real" Indians or not.

You apparently imply that Reconstruction-era attempts at slave reparation were wrong, but when they failed, the consequence was that de jure formal slaves became de facto wage slaves: http://www.landandfreedom.org/ushistory/us15.htm

One day a few negroes was sticking sticks in the ground when massa come up. "What you niggers doing?" he asked. "We is staking off the land, Massa. The Yankees say half of it is ourn. The massa never got mad. He just look calmlike. "Listen, niggers," he said, "What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours. You're just as free as I and the missus, but don't go fooling around my land. I have tried to be a good master to you. I have never been unfair. Now if you wants to stay, you are welcome to work for me. I'll pay you one-third the crops you raise. But if you wants to go, you sees the gate.

So what do you think the consequence of this was?



Speaking of reparations is not meaningful to me, however, since I don't believe that genuine reparation is possible under capitalism.

Are you claiming to be "currently harmed"?

No, and it's not relevant, since I don't take personal experiences as indicative of general trends for a group. The fact is that American Indians are the poorest ethnic group in the country.

[darin]

The fact is that American Indians are the poorest ethnic group in the country.

everybody (by everybody I mean 90%) if those in America who are at or below the poverty line are ultimately there by choice.

[Agnapostate]

everybody (by everybody I mean 90%) if those in America who are at or below the poverty line are ultimately there by choice.

I'm not interested in your silly little utopian fantasies.

[Trigg]

[QUOTE=Agnapostate;444973]



All persons with a degree of Amerindian genetic admixture significant enough to constitute the majority contribution to their phenotype are classified as "Indians" by me. That group includes me. All persons with a degree that influences but does not necessarily dominate their admixture are mixed-bloods, and predominantly European persons are simply whites, in my view. So, in terms of casual analysis, I am an Indian, my maternal grandmother is a mixed-blood, and the maternal cousin of mine that you saw is white.



"1/16 Cherokee" whites and their great-great-grandmother princesses are fakes, yes. [QUOTE]

It matters NOT what YOU consider white, mixed blood or true Indian. It matters what the tribes THEMSELVES consider Indian.

In fact if you can prove that you are even 1/32 Cherokee you can receive your card.

I didn't ask you about slave reparations. I asked you about Indian reparations, lets stay on topic shall we?

Personally I disagree with reparations. But, I guarantee that if reparations start being offered to people with Indian ancestry that everyone with a hint of Indian blood will be lining up.

Indians may be the poorest ethnic group in America, but there is no reason for them to be. They are offered the same education and resources as every other group in this country. A person who is a minority and poor is handed money hand over fist in this country, it is asinine to ignore that fact.

[Agnapostate]

It matters NOT what YOU consider white, mixed blood or true Indian. It matters what the tribes THEMSELVES consider Indian.

In fact if you can prove that you are even 1/32 Cherokee you can receive your card.

That's simply an indication that tribes need to establish stricter blood quantum laws, even at the expense of higher membership rates. Enrollment documents should not function as little novelty items for white wannabes to wave around excitedly.

I didn't ask you about slave reparations. I asked you about Indian reparations, lets stay on topic shall we?

Personally I disagree with reparations. But, I guarantee that if reparations start being offered to people with Indian ancestry that everyone with a hint of Indian blood will be lining up.

I disagree with reparations too. The only comprehensive reparation that can benefit all that are residually harmed is the abolition of capitalism. But as I said, if reparations were the only conceivable option that could occur under the capitalist economic paradigm, that program should be restricted to real Indians that could demonstrate legitimate residual harm.

Indians may be the poorest ethnic group in America, but there is no reason for them to be. They are offered the same education and resources as every other group in this country. A person who is a minority and poor is handed money hand over fist in this country, it is asinine to ignore that fact.

This is just your white populist racial resentment manifesting itself. If you're going to continue with this fantasy line of thought, you'll have to explain why Scandinavian social democracies have higher social mobility and lower poverty and unemployment alongside larger welfare states. Wouldn't those programs motivate apathy and laziness, according to your view? Your husband seems to disagree with you, you know. Maybe you should talk to him.

[Trigg]

This is just your white populist racial resentment manifesting itself. If you're going to continue with this fantasy line of thought, you'll have to explain why Scandinavian social democracies have higher social mobility and lower poverty and unemployment alongside larger welfare states. Wouldn't those programs motivate apathy and laziness, according to your view? Your husband seems to disagree with you, you know. Maybe you should talk to him.

Well I'm not white so I guess I have no "white populist racial resentment".

You really want to claim that poor minorities aren't given more opportunities to succeed than white/Asian people?

The poor and minorities are given free heath care, subsidized housing, free education, scholarships and grants for college. Poor minorities are given more than poor whites and Asians.

I don't have to explain anything happening in Scandinavia, I DON'T LIVE THERE. I live in the US and that is the country we are discussing.

[Pagan]

>> snip <<

This is just your white populist racial resentment manifesting itself. If you're going to continue with this fantasy line of thought, you'll have to explain why Scandinavian social democracies have higher social mobility and lower poverty and unemployment alongside larger welfare states. Wouldn't those programs motivate apathy and laziness, according to your view? Your husband seems to disagree with you, you know. Maybe you should talk to him.

fuck your ignorance knows no bounds.

I'll through something at you Slick, I've got a good healthy dose of Sioux in my veins, my Great Grandmother was full blood Sioux. You're just an ignorant bigoted fool. Over 90% of the so called poor here in the U.S. are there by choice. Also having traveled a bit around the world I can say with no reservation there is no poverty in the U.S.

[Agnapostate]

Well I'm not white so I guess I have no "white populist racial resentment".

LOL, I'm guessing you're Indian too. Cherokee great-great-grandmother and all, Princess Moonbeam?

You really want to claim that poor minorities aren't given more opportunities to succeed than white/Asian people?

The poor and minorities are given free heath care, subsidized housing, free education, scholarships and grants for college. Poor minorities are given more than poor whites and Asians.

I don't have to explain anything happening in Scandinavia, I DON'T LIVE THERE. I live in the US and that is the country we are discussing.

Yes, and the U.S. is characterized by the highest poverty rate among first-world industrialized countries, as well as the severest constraints on social mobility. That happens to particularly impact ethnic minorities, as statistical research demonstrates. Of course, you'll simply reply with some little anecdote that you'll insist overwhelms all evidence to the contrary.

fuck your ignorance knows no bounds.

I'll through something at you Slick, I've got a good healthy dose of Sioux in my veins, my Great Grandmother was full blood Sioux. You're just an ignorant bigoted fool. Over 90% of the so called poor here in the U.S. are there by choice. Also having traveled a bit around the world I can say with no reservation there is no poverty in the U.S.

Great-grandson of the Sioux princess Walks in Moonlight, great-great-grandson of Great Warrior Slays Pale Faces, great-great-great-grandson of Sitting Bull himself!

[Noir]

Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't, I don't know.

But I am interested to know what you think should be done if it's decided there was? If Obama went on TV tonight and said that he acknowledged genocide took place, that what happened was a cruel act of savagery, and that he wished to issue an apology for what took place, would that be enough or would you want something more?