4 ms·

I don’t think there exists a clean logical explanation for why any sort of ancestral background should grant rights over land anywhere - your confusion makes pl

by smeeth 6y ago

I don’t think there exists a clean logical explanation for why any sort of ancestral background should grant rights over land anywhere - your confusion makes plenty of sense. In America this issue is tied to socioeconomic disparities in race. To be born Native American today is to be born with higher likelihoods of poverty, alcoholism, low life expectancy, etc. These disparities are to some degree (how much is a hotly debated topic down political lines) a consequence of white people treating native peoples like shit (vast simplification) for ~500 years. Prevailing thought on the American political left is that since taking away native land illegally (and other atrocities) created these disparities, giving them their land back is the just and obvious thing to do (this conclusion is much debated). The left feels, generally, that disparities are unnatural, caused by those in power (white settlers and their descendants), and are to be stamped out. The political right, as best I can tell, both doesn’t agree with that assessment and doesn’t care. To integrate fully would be the ultimate subjugation: to accept the destruction of a culture and way of life they care deeply about that has already been almost totally taken from them by force. The political left believes this shouldn’t be demanded of an already downtrodden people. Re your Europe question: I believe the thinking goes that natives there are rich, so why should they have more even more land rights? The political poles are flipped, the political left sees no injustice to be fixed by empowering the privileged. I’m a white American, so my opinion should be discounted appropriately.

beerandt 6y ago
>socioeconomic disparities in race. To be born Native American today is to be born with higher likelihoods of poverty, alcoholism, Important in this context: the predisposition to alcoholism is a known genetic one. It complicates many of the issues you describe.
kypro 6y ago
Thanks for the polite response, I was quite nervous about asking the question incase it was perceived poorly to be honest. It sounds like my problem is that I'm looking for a one fits all solution. I guess the answer is that Americans have decided different groups are entitled to different things based on historical events and inequalities. I tend to think quite individualistically so treating someone differently based on their ancestral background doesn't come naturally to me. > Re your Europe question: I believe the thinking goes that natives there are rich, so why should they have more even more land rights? The political poles are flipped, the political left sees no injustice to be fixed by empowering the privileged. I will say that in my experience isn't true, at least if you're looking on an individual level. Part of the reason I asked the question is because I've asked the reverse to people here in the UK. I'm from a working class background and I know a lot of Brits from working class backgrounds who are unhappy with being "minorities" and feeling culturally alienated because of immigration into their communities. I know one elderly man who due to the effects of migration now lives in a majority Muslim area of my city and often expresses his sadness with no longer being able to enjoy Christmas with his neighbours or not being able to read the posters put up in his council flat, etc. I've found here in Britain people rarely take these complaints seriously. When I ask people here if we should feel some sympathy for those who feel they're losing "their culture" as "their group" becomes the minority the answer is typically that they need to get with times and adapt to the change, but I'm aware that this is different from the American perspective, which does take the concerns of native groups becoming minorities due to immigration seriously. Funnily enough the only time I've heard anyone give a different answer was from a Muslim immigrant and I wonder if that was because of their sympathy for the struggles of being a minority. I don't know if there is a right answer to this though. If we want to become are more globalised world these changes are inevitable, but at the same time time I do seem to feel some sympathy knowing that not everyone is asking to live in a globalised world and that many would like to continue living in a nation that resembles the one of their ancestors. I'm just rambling now, but I think about this a lot because I know it's the cause of many problems in the West today (Trump, Brexit, nationalism) and it seems we have quite poor, or at least highly contradictory answers – some cultures deserve to be preserved, some need to get with the times; some natives have rights to their ancestral lands, others are racist for wanting the same; some groups concerns over being a minorities is valid, some groups need to just accept their new minority status. These answers, at least to me, don't seem to be satisfactory. I don't know what the answer is, and I doubt there is a perfect one, but at the very least our answers to these questions shouldn't be contradictory.
- smeeth 6y ago
  I have three small things to add - your perspective is a very interesting one. 1) I think you are conflating America and the American opinion with the opinion of the political left. Not everyone cares about history and inequality here. The political right in America would love to integrate native people and don’t much care for native land rights. Excuse my lacking knowledge about your country, but it seems like you are also conflating the general UK sentiment with labour supporters. Wasn’t brexit a direct response to immigration and cultural changes of the sort you said isn’t taken seriously? It certainly seemed that way to an outsider like me. 2) I think you hit the nail on the head when you said > I will say that in my experience isn't true, at least if you're looking on an individual level. My take is that neither political party individuates in the way you are. A rich black man here, to the left, is black and therefore a member of an unprivileged minority who deserves help and further advantagement. To the right, he is rich and needs no help. Both parties generalize, but their heuristics for doing so are different. 3) I’m not sure our countries are so dissimilar! There has been much talk that Trump was a consequence of white fear of being a minority. Popular sentiment on the left is that those whites need to shut up and accept it. That sounds very similar to your example, with the minor difference of whites being nonnative in America. Google “the war on Christmas” for a silly example of how the American right feels culturally alienated by minority encroachment.
- nerdponx 6y ago
  I'm not sure this is some weird American thing like you're making it out to be. I'm curious how you feel about similar situations in other regions... Ireland under Great Britain, the Israel-Palestine conflict, European colonization of Africa and South Asia, Japanese imperialism, American annexation of Hawaii, et multa alia.

by smeeth 6y ago

beerandt 6y ago

>socioeconomic disparities in race. To be born Native American today is to be born with higher likelihoods of poverty, alcoholism, Important in this context: the predisposition to alcoholism is a known genetic one. It complicates many of the issues you describe.

kypro 6y ago

Thanks for the polite response, I was quite nervous about asking the question incase it was perceived poorly to be honest. It sounds like my problem is that I'm looking for a one fits all solution. I guess the answer is that Americans have decided different groups are entitled to different things based on historical events and inequalities. I tend to think quite individualistically so treating someone differently based on their ancestral background doesn't come naturally to me. > Re your Europe question: I believe the thinking goes that natives there are rich, so why should they have more even more land rights? The political poles are flipped, the political left sees no injustice to be fixed by empowering the privileged. I will say that in my experience isn't true, at least if you're looking on an individual level. Part of the reason I asked the question is because I've asked the reverse to people here in the UK. I'm from a working class background and I know a lot of Brits from working class backgrounds who are unhappy with being "minorities" and feeling culturally alienated because of immigration into their communities. I know one elderly man who due to the effects of migration now lives in a majority Muslim area of my city and often expresses his sadness with no longer being able to enjoy Christmas with his neighbours or not being able to read the posters put up in his council flat, etc. I've found here in Britain people rarely take these complaints seriously. When I ask people here if we should feel some sympathy for those who feel they're losing "their culture" as "their group" becomes the minority the answer is typically that they need to get with times and adapt to the change, but I'm aware that this is different from the American perspective, which does take the concerns of native groups becoming minorities due to immigration seriously. Funnily enough the only time I've heard anyone give a different answer was from a Muslim immigrant and I wonder if that was because of their sympathy for the struggles of being a minority. I don't know if there is a right answer to this though. If we want to become are more globalised world these changes are inevitable, but at the same time time I do seem to feel some sympathy knowing that not everyone is asking to live in a globalised world and that many would like to continue living in a nation that resembles the one of their ancestors. I'm just rambling now, but I think about this a lot because I know it's the cause of many problems in the West today (Trump, Brexit, nationalism) and it seems we have quite poor, or at least highly contradictory answers – some cultures deserve to be preserved, some need to get with the times; some natives have rights to their ancestral lands, others are racist for wanting the same; some groups concerns over being a minorities is valid, some groups need to just accept their new minority status. These answers, at least to me, don't seem to be satisfactory. I don't know what the answer is, and I doubt there is a perfect one, but at the very least our answers to these questions shouldn't be contradictory.

smeeth 6y ago
I have three small things to add - your perspective is a very interesting one. 1) I think you are conflating America and the American opinion with the opinion of the political left. Not everyone cares about history and inequality here. The political right in America would love to integrate native people and don’t much care for native land rights. Excuse my lacking knowledge about your country, but it seems like you are also conflating the general UK sentiment with labour supporters. Wasn’t brexit a direct response to immigration and cultural changes of the sort you said isn’t taken seriously? It certainly seemed that way to an outsider like me. 2) I think you hit the nail on the head when you said > I will say that in my experience isn't true, at least if you're looking on an individual level. My take is that neither political party individuates in the way you are. A rich black man here, to the left, is black and therefore a member of an unprivileged minority who deserves help and further advantagement. To the right, he is rich and needs no help. Both parties generalize, but their heuristics for doing so are different. 3) I’m not sure our countries are so dissimilar! There has been much talk that Trump was a consequence of white fear of being a minority. Popular sentiment on the left is that those whites need to shut up and accept it. That sounds very similar to your example, with the minor difference of whites being nonnative in America. Google “the war on Christmas” for a silly example of how the American right feels culturally alienated by minority encroachment.
nerdponx 6y ago
I'm not sure this is some weird American thing like you're making it out to be. I'm curious how you feel about similar situations in other regions... Ireland under Great Britain, the Israel-Palestine conflict, European colonization of Africa and South Asia, Japanese imperialism, American annexation of Hawaii, et multa alia.