3 ms·

Reservations are prisoner of war camps from the 19th century that persist to this day. It is more illuminating to compare them to other similarly situated peopl

Reservations are prisoner of war camps from the 19th century that persist to this day. It is more illuminating to compare them to other similarly situated people around the world in terms of their social services and freedom to develop self governance

brutt 6y ago
LOL. Reservations are inverse of war camps. They are not for keeping them in, they are for keeping you out.
sterlind 6y ago
It's more complicated than that, at least now. Having land, even crummy land away from the ancestral homeland, is better than not having land, because: a) you can afford to live there, as an extremely economically disadvantaged group. b) your tribe is in one place, instead of scattered, which makes it possible to continue to have a group identity and c) you have at least limited autonomy. I know people in tribes that have been shafted by the BIA and refused official recognition or land. It hurts. See the documentary "Promised Land" [0] for their account. 0. https://www.promisedlanddoc.com/ https://www.promisedlanddoc.com/
- kingkawn 6y ago
  A) in utter poverty created by the wars to expel and corral them into small, infertile, resourceless areas B) It is good to be with your folks, I agree, even when forced into captivity together C) their autonomy is violated essentially at whim by the fed, state, and local governments since the reservation system was created. You can see this happening now with Gov Noam in South Dakota and the Lakota
  - sterlind 6y ago
    Oh, I'm totally in agreement that the situation is unfair and that the US government engaged in genocide and cultural extermination of native peoples, and that reservations were created as ghettos for Indians so the whites could take their desirable lands. I am merely pointing out that there are tribes that have been denied federal recognition or reservations and want them, because a crappy deal is still better than no deal.
    - kingkawn 6y ago
      Sure. But I was responding to the initial comment suggesting that the overwhelming spread in their community represented a failure of governance on their part in comparison to national governments like Vietnam

brutt 6y ago

LOL. Reservations are inverse of war camps. They are not for keeping them in, they are for keeping you out.

sterlind 6y ago

It's more complicated than that, at least now. Having land, even crummy land away from the ancestral homeland, is better than not having land, because: a) you can afford to live there, as an extremely economically disadvantaged group. b) your tribe is in one place, instead of scattered, which makes it possible to continue to have a group identity and c) you have at least limited autonomy. I know people in tribes that have been shafted by the BIA and refused official recognition or land. It hurts. See the documentary "Promised Land" [0] for their account. 0. https://www.promisedlanddoc.com/ https://www.promisedlanddoc.com/

kingkawn 6y ago
A) in utter poverty created by the wars to expel and corral them into small, infertile, resourceless areas B) It is good to be with your folks, I agree, even when forced into captivity together C) their autonomy is violated essentially at whim by the fed, state, and local governments since the reservation system was created. You can see this happening now with Gov Noam in South Dakota and the Lakota
- sterlind 6y ago
  Oh, I'm totally in agreement that the situation is unfair and that the US government engaged in genocide and cultural extermination of native peoples, and that reservations were created as ghettos for Indians so the whites could take their desirable lands. I am merely pointing out that there are tribes that have been denied federal recognition or reservations and want them, because a crappy deal is still better than no deal.
  - kingkawn 6y ago
    Sure. But I was responding to the initial comment suggesting that the overwhelming spread in their community represented a failure of governance on their part in comparison to national governments like Vietnam