3 ms·

Parent poster is possibly from a generation which has been taught that asking questions is an offense, so I will forgive them for responding with hostility. I

Parent poster is possibly from a generation which has been taught that asking questions is an offense, so I will forgive them for responding with hostility. I am curious what other people feel about the issue of "nativeness". As a European American I obviously am interested in understanding how the world views the rights my children might have to the land in which they will be born. Is there a time limit for when an occupier or invader becomes a native? The question of whether or not Ancient Egypt belongs in some way to modern Egypt(the government or its people) is perhaps less politically sensitive than asking whether myself, my people or my government bear some connection to the culture of ancient North Americans. It is a relevant question I believe. One could ask how such issues relate to other cultures around the world. As the descendants of conquerors, I am compelled by circumstances to believe "might makes right" or else I would have to consider returning to the land to which I have ancient connections. I understand this is a sensitive question and likely to trigger folks who believe I am trying to lay a rhetorical trap or secretly push some right or left wing agenda but I am simply trying to think through what I believe to be right.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
There is a troubling and growing anti-intellectual, anti-scientific movement I have seen which seeks to make certain questions verboten. The idea that because somebody is or claims to be offended by another person's curiosity about the world, that we must stop asking questions ("or else") is, to me, offensive. Keep questioning everything. Social theories and traditions and status quo should be no safer from questioning than anything else. Stand up to those stuck in their ways or feel their position in the status quo is threatened by people's curiosity. In my experience, people who claim a line of questioning is offensive are usually not offended but scared and probably unwilling or unable to provide answers or defend their position with reason. Your question isn't a rhetorical trap at all, it was actually very interesting and thoughtful, and possibly exposes some inconsistencies in the way these kinds of historical right to ownership are thought about in different cases, which I had not previously thought about.
- leto_ii 5y ago
  > There is a troubling and growing anti-intellectual, anti-scientific movement I have seen which seeks to make certain questions verboten. The question was offensive, yet I didn't try to cancel the author in any way. I didn't flag the comment, I didn't email dang to have the author's account blocked etc. I instead offered an explanation of my position in polite but firm terms, with some argumentation. The question had nothing scientific in it, so there's no need to worry about opposition to science btw. > Social theories and traditions and status quo should be no safer from questioning than anything else. Definitely agreed, freedom of speech should be sacrosanct in any civilized placed. You should have the right to, for example, claim that the Holocaust didn't happen and I should have the right to tell you that you're wrong and that your position is deeply offensive. That's how free speech works. > unwilling or unable to provide answers or defend their position with reason. I did provide arguments for my position. > inconsistencies in the way these kinds of historical right to ownership are thought about in different cases In general I think the first thing to ask is: did the majority of the people living in that place at that time freely consented with the removal of their artifacts? I'm curious btw, do you think what Elgin did with the Parthenon is fair game too?
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    Everything is offensive to somebody. I don't know what you mean by "cancel the author". You clearly don't want the questions being asked or the issue discussed, don't try to play innocent about it. And there has never been greater need to worry about opposition to science. > Definitely agreed, freedom of speech should be sacrosanct in any civilized placed. You should have the right to, for example, claim that the Holocaust didn't happen Bully. > I did provide arguments for my position. You didn't. "I'm offended" is not an argument. > In general I think the first thing to ask is: did the majority of the people living in that place at that time freely consented with the removal of their artifacts? This is not an argument either, it does not address the question asked and now apparently you don't find it offensive to discuss the issue anymore it seems like it's something you've just made up without thinking much. The issues in question go a lot deeper -- if one group of people displaces another, how do the artifacts become "theirs". An interesting question (note that I did not take the position one way or the other whether this was the case in Egypt). > I'm curious btw, do you think what Elgin did with the Parthenon is fair game too? Define "fair game". This is not some gotcha, I never said I thought removing Egyptian artifacts was "fair game". And as to the current discussion, modern Greeks clearly have strong ancestral lineages to ancient Greeks.
leto_ii 5y ago
> Parent poster is possibly from a generation which has been taught that asking questions is an offense, so I will forgive them for responding with hostility. Your condescension is ill placed. Questions can very much be offensive, let me give you another example: "Are Jews really related to people? Because if they're not then I really don't see the fuss about this Holocaust thing." See how that's offensive? > As a European American I obviously am interested in understanding how the world views the rights my children might have to the land in which they will be born Your children will and should have exactly the same rights as anybody else born there. This does not erase the genocide of the American Indians or the obligation of the US (perpetually unacknowledged) to offer reparations and dignity to the remaining populations. > As the descendants of conquerors, I am compelled by circumstances to believe "might makes right" or else I would have to consider returning to the land to which I have ancient connections. I don't see how yours can be a reasonable position. If we start accepting "might makes right" just to excuse the atrocities committed by our ancestors we will regress back to early modernity, before things like the universal human rights, self-determination etc. You don't need to return any land and you don't need to claim ancient connections (which you probably don't have anyway). Your rights stem from the basic fact that you're a human being. If let's say another imperialist nation (e.g. China, since the yellow peril is en vogue again) would invade the US and exterminate the existing population justice would and should be on your side. It shouldn't be "might makes right", right?
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  > "Are Jews really related to people? Because if they're not then I really don't see the fuss about this Holocaust thing." Totally disingenuous. You are continuing to escalate your bullying behavior and anti-intellectualism. People who ask questions you are scared of are not nazis. Calling for open debate and questioning free of bullying is not some a tacit admission that you would advocate this hatred you're spewing. This is not a gotcha moment, it's just sick. The nazis were the book burners. Don't forget that.
  - leto_ii 5y ago
    Yeah, ok, you're a troll, I get it now.

throwawaylinux 5y ago

There is a troubling and growing anti-intellectual, anti-scientific movement I have seen which seeks to make certain questions verboten. The idea that because somebody is or claims to be offended by another person's curiosity about the world, that we must stop asking questions ("or else") is, to me, offensive. Keep questioning everything. Social theories and traditions and status quo should be no safer from questioning than anything else. Stand up to those stuck in their ways or feel their position in the status quo is threatened by people's curiosity. In my experience, people who claim a line of questioning is offensive are usually not offended but scared and probably unwilling or unable to provide answers or defend their position with reason. Your question isn't a rhetorical trap at all, it was actually very interesting and thoughtful, and possibly exposes some inconsistencies in the way these kinds of historical right to ownership are thought about in different cases, which I had not previously thought about.

leto_ii 5y ago
> There is a troubling and growing anti-intellectual, anti-scientific movement I have seen which seeks to make certain questions verboten. The question was offensive, yet I didn't try to cancel the author in any way. I didn't flag the comment, I didn't email dang to have the author's account blocked etc. I instead offered an explanation of my position in polite but firm terms, with some argumentation. The question had nothing scientific in it, so there's no need to worry about opposition to science btw. > Social theories and traditions and status quo should be no safer from questioning than anything else. Definitely agreed, freedom of speech should be sacrosanct in any civilized placed. You should have the right to, for example, claim that the Holocaust didn't happen and I should have the right to tell you that you're wrong and that your position is deeply offensive. That's how free speech works. > unwilling or unable to provide answers or defend their position with reason. I did provide arguments for my position. > inconsistencies in the way these kinds of historical right to ownership are thought about in different cases In general I think the first thing to ask is: did the majority of the people living in that place at that time freely consented with the removal of their artifacts? I'm curious btw, do you think what Elgin did with the Parthenon is fair game too?
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Everything is offensive to somebody. I don't know what you mean by "cancel the author". You clearly don't want the questions being asked or the issue discussed, don't try to play innocent about it. And there has never been greater need to worry about opposition to science. > Definitely agreed, freedom of speech should be sacrosanct in any civilized placed. You should have the right to, for example, claim that the Holocaust didn't happen Bully. > I did provide arguments for my position. You didn't. "I'm offended" is not an argument. > In general I think the first thing to ask is: did the majority of the people living in that place at that time freely consented with the removal of their artifacts? This is not an argument either, it does not address the question asked and now apparently you don't find it offensive to discuss the issue anymore it seems like it's something you've just made up without thinking much. The issues in question go a lot deeper -- if one group of people displaces another, how do the artifacts become "theirs". An interesting question (note that I did not take the position one way or the other whether this was the case in Egypt). > I'm curious btw, do you think what Elgin did with the Parthenon is fair game too? Define "fair game". This is not some gotcha, I never said I thought removing Egyptian artifacts was "fair game". And as to the current discussion, modern Greeks clearly have strong ancestral lineages to ancient Greeks.

leto_ii 5y ago

> Parent poster is possibly from a generation which has been taught that asking questions is an offense, so I will forgive them for responding with hostility. Your condescension is ill placed. Questions can very much be offensive, let me give you another example: "Are Jews really related to people? Because if they're not then I really don't see the fuss about this Holocaust thing." See how that's offensive? > As a European American I obviously am interested in understanding how the world views the rights my children might have to the land in which they will be born Your children will and should have exactly the same rights as anybody else born there. This does not erase the genocide of the American Indians or the obligation of the US (perpetually unacknowledged) to offer reparations and dignity to the remaining populations. > As the descendants of conquerors, I am compelled by circumstances to believe "might makes right" or else I would have to consider returning to the land to which I have ancient connections. I don't see how yours can be a reasonable position. If we start accepting "might makes right" just to excuse the atrocities committed by our ancestors we will regress back to early modernity, before things like the universal human rights, self-determination etc. You don't need to return any land and you don't need to claim ancient connections (which you probably don't have anyway). Your rights stem from the basic fact that you're a human being. If let's say another imperialist nation (e.g. China, since the yellow peril is en vogue again) would invade the US and exterminate the existing population justice would and should be on your side. It shouldn't be "might makes right", right?

throwawaylinux 5y ago
> "Are Jews really related to people? Because if they're not then I really don't see the fuss about this Holocaust thing." Totally disingenuous. You are continuing to escalate your bullying behavior and anti-intellectualism. People who ask questions you are scared of are not nazis. Calling for open debate and questioning free of bullying is not some a tacit admission that you would advocate this hatred you're spewing. This is not a gotcha moment, it's just sick. The nazis were the book burners. Don't forget that.
- leto_ii 5y ago
  Yeah, ok, you're a troll, I get it now.