• nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 years ago

    Of course I’m gonna assume good faith from you here, but I feel like some people boil down issues like this to “well I mean I didn’t do it so stop complaining”, and that’s wildly reductive and irresponsible at minimum.

    Arguing the situation in this way sidesteps the uncomfortable and inconvenient reality that the United States is yet still occupying native land, whether it be Hawai’i, Alaska, or the contiguous territories. Yes it’s entirely possible that mine or your ancestors didn’t perpetuate these things as immigration is and has always been ongoing, but the point everyone misses is that we are still here.

    I couldn’t possibly imagine belittling natives for acknowledging the fact that their land was taken from them by force. Some real colonialist shit.

    • Blapoo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I feel you, and also acknowledge it is a hairy subject on a grand scale.

      I also try to frame the issue in the actual, real moment. I try my damndest to do as little harm as humanly possible to anyone. Should I be forced to give money to someone affected? Land? Should I be punished?

      Who benefits? A grandson of someone displaced? A great great grandson? Whole family trees? How do you make shit like this right after so much time?

      Mostly, I’m trying to encourage thought and discussion. Fundamentally, I think people should be judged on their own merits and actions, not their lineage.

      • BOMBS@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        The way I understand it is that even if we omit any ancestral blame for what happened, the Native Americans are still dealing with the impact while European descendants benefit from it. It’s kind of like if I went to school with a very bright kid that was horribly abused and kicked out into the streets, so they performed poorly and dropped out, allowing me to get into the best college possible and have a great career. Why should I have any compassion for this kid if I didn’t abuse them myself? Why would I help them get housed and into college? Why would I even acknowledge that they were abused and forced out of their home? I’m one that earned it by working hard to get into college and graduate.

        This omits the possibility that this kid might have outperformed me and taken the college spot, leaving me to be in a worse off situation.

        • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Not 1000% on board with your analogy, but I understand and fully agree lol.

          I just wish most people had the empathy and mental capacity to understand the intricacies of this stuff. It’s a hell of a lot easier to just say “uH wOw I ain’t payin reparations for no dang indians” than it is to actually think for a minute about and acknowledge the real history of where you live

        • Blapoo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          How far back in time are we going to enact justice? My 36x Great uncle Olaf never got his comeuppance (/s a little)

          • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            As far back as required to make those involved feel as if they were compensated. If you feel that 36x Great uncle Olaf’s loss affects your Family Today, then you should have your day in Court to make the case. However, as most likely 36x Great uncle Olaf was in fact not involved in anything in a currently oppressed People’s past, it’ll be a hard case to make.

      • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        That will always be an issue until the US government actually has real communication and cooperation with native people.

        I don’t necessarily think that citizens of occupied land are automatically responsible for the past actions of a government (not to say that’s what you implied), but said government that committed the atrocities is. As far as the other part of the equation, I suppose the beneficiaries should be determined by the natives themselves.

      • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        The outcome needs to be negotiated and yes, the Tax Payer should foot the bill for the redress for the actions of the State and individual wealthy Families should foot the bill for the crimes their wealth stems from. For example: the entirety of Oklahoma’s rather impressively inhumane treatment of the Native Tribes needs to be dealt with as the People that profited from the malfeasance are still holding the proceeds of those crimes.

    • lukini@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      What about the tribes that lost wars to other tribes? Do they get their old land? How far back are we going?

        • lukini@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Why is only one relevant? Is it the brutality of the war that matters? Or the recency?

          • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Because those Tribes are not currently benefiting from the land they took. And most likely are in the same boat if they still exist.

          • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            No reason to not give you the benefit of the doubt, but you’re giving off heavy “they were already killing each other so it’s no big deal” vibes. No insult intended, just what I’m picking up.

            Intertribal conflict is the tribes’ business, colonizing and displacing is colonists’ business. To be clear, external invasion is the concern here