9 ms·

I don’t understand this comment. What does Indian tribal land have to do with the naming of this discovery?

KingOfCoders 5y ago
What I assume the poster meant - I might of course be wrong - is that the in the US discoveries are named after the location names of white settlers, not by the names of the locations that the people called them, that the white settlers killed to take the land. e.g. someone says "Discovered in New York" instead of how the land was named by the Native Americans who lived there and were killed.
- stormdennis 5y ago
  Manhattan is derived from a native American phrase or word as far as I know.
  - KingOfCoders 5y ago
    You're right, looks like a bastardized version of "manaháhtaan" says Wikipedia.
gelert 5y ago
I think the reply is meant to be a critique of the above comment. They assumed that the first commentator was American, so said that given America entirely consists of land inhabited by displaced peoples (American Indians) that it's hypocritical to criticise Israel, which partially consists of that kind of land, for the same injustice.
- stormdennis 5y ago
  To be accurate, Israel also entirely consists of that kind of land.
  - skinkestek 5y ago
    This is kind of very correct but also very misleading: Israel is partly bought, partly doled out by UN and partly won in war. Yes, many Arabs were displaced and with a course enough resolution there was an Arab within x kilometers everywhere in what has become Israel. Also at the same time even more Jews where chased out from the countries around. At no point did North American tribes drive out more Europeans (or any at all) than Europeans drove out Native Americans. There can hardly be peace until we get the facts straight, both ways, so we should strive for that.
    - stormdennis 5y ago
      I don't know how it is misleading. In 1947, the Jews were 33% of the population and owned just 6% of the land of Palestine, yet a UN of only 46 countries and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish state which zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population. The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians but also by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues. Israel, a European colony largely, now needed Mizrahi Jews since the European Jews had been subjected to genocide. Of course some Jews in places like Yemen were zionists also and emigrated for that reason. Anything non-factual in that?
      - phlofy 5y ago
        You had a point until you brought up the Yemeni Jews who had been oppressed for generations treated as second class citizens, charged a "protection tax," banned from wearing the traditional Sudra as a form of humiliation, and more recently persecuted by the Houthis. The plight of the Palestinians is very real, but refrain from rewriting the history of Yemeni Jews. Educate yourself.
      - yyyk 5y ago
        >Anything non-factual in that? Nearly all of it (either non factual or so tilted as to be non factual)? > owned just 6% of the land of Palestine Absurd criteria - what does wealth have to do with it? Splitting America by 'ownership' would give 100% to rich WASP. By the way, Most local land was owned by families not living in the country or was unowned desert. >55% of the land for a Jewish state The big difference being the Negev desert, because it was thought the new state would need somewhere to settle WW2 refugees. The Jewish state got much less of the useful fertile areas. >The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians Displacement was caused by the local states and its beginning predated the UN partition (1941 farhud, 1945 Tripolitania massacre, etc.). > zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population You mean 'directly caused by the constant attacks by 7 states and the local Arab population', right? Just applying the same standards you apply, but without inverting chronology this time. >by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues Based on 'confessions' accomplished by torture. The actual actions of the Iraqi government are oddly ignored. Modern Iraqi history is littered with letting inconvenient populations be displaced (from Assyrians, to Iraqi Persians to Marsh Arabs to Kurds to Yazidis and yes, Jews) and always blaming it on someone else.

What I assume the poster meant - I might of course be wrong - is that the in the US discoveries are named after the location names of white settlers, not by the names of the locations that the people called them, that the white settlers killed to take the land. e.g. someone says "Discovered in New York" instead of how the land was named by the Native Americans who lived there and were killed.

stormdennis 5y ago
Manhattan is derived from a native American phrase or word as far as I know.
- KingOfCoders 5y ago
  You're right, looks like a bastardized version of "manaháhtaan" says Wikipedia.

gelert 5y ago

I think the reply is meant to be a critique of the above comment. They assumed that the first commentator was American, so said that given America entirely consists of land inhabited by displaced peoples (American Indians) that it's hypocritical to criticise Israel, which partially consists of that kind of land, for the same injustice.

stormdennis 5y ago
To be accurate, Israel also entirely consists of that kind of land.
- skinkestek 5y ago
  This is kind of very correct but also very misleading: Israel is partly bought, partly doled out by UN and partly won in war. Yes, many Arabs were displaced and with a course enough resolution there was an Arab within x kilometers everywhere in what has become Israel. Also at the same time even more Jews where chased out from the countries around. At no point did North American tribes drive out more Europeans (or any at all) than Europeans drove out Native Americans. There can hardly be peace until we get the facts straight, both ways, so we should strive for that.
  - stormdennis 5y ago
    I don't know how it is misleading. In 1947, the Jews were 33% of the population and owned just 6% of the land of Palestine, yet a UN of only 46 countries and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish state which zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population. The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians but also by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues. Israel, a European colony largely, now needed Mizrahi Jews since the European Jews had been subjected to genocide. Of course some Jews in places like Yemen were zionists also and emigrated for that reason. Anything non-factual in that?
    - phlofy 5y ago
      You had a point until you brought up the Yemeni Jews who had been oppressed for generations treated as second class citizens, charged a "protection tax," banned from wearing the traditional Sudra as a form of humiliation, and more recently persecuted by the Houthis. The plight of the Palestinians is very real, but refrain from rewriting the history of Yemeni Jews. Educate yourself.
    - yyyk 5y ago
      >Anything non-factual in that? Nearly all of it (either non factual or so tilted as to be non factual)? > owned just 6% of the land of Palestine Absurd criteria - what does wealth have to do with it? Splitting America by 'ownership' would give 100% to rich WASP. By the way, Most local land was owned by families not living in the country or was unowned desert. >55% of the land for a Jewish state The big difference being the Negev desert, because it was thought the new state would need somewhere to settle WW2 refugees. The Jewish state got much less of the useful fertile areas. >The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians Displacement was caused by the local states and its beginning predated the UN partition (1941 farhud, 1945 Tripolitania massacre, etc.). > zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population You mean 'directly caused by the constant attacks by 7 states and the local Arab population', right? Just applying the same standards you apply, but without inverting chronology this time. >by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues Based on 'confessions' accomplished by torture. The actual actions of the Iraqi government are oddly ignored. Modern Iraqi history is littered with letting inconvenient populations be displaced (from Assyrians, to Iraqi Persians to Marsh Arabs to Kurds to Yazidis and yes, Jews) and always blaming it on someone else.