3 ms·
The point is just because someone in some position of authority (who may have been motivated by greed or fear) at one time agreed to sell off land or precious a
by suzzer99 4y ago
The point is just because someone in some position of authority (who may have been motivated by greed or fear) at one time agreed to sell off land or precious artifacts, that may not make it right to keep them.
- MomoXenosaga 4y agoGreed and fear are part of the human condition. Every piece of land on this planet exchanged hands a hundred times under those terms so I wonder how far you want to go back. The native Americans also had their tribal wars although that seems to be memory holed by liberals.
- suzzer99 4y agoSure. That still doesn't make it right, or mean that we can't even acknowledge the theft. There are plenty of cases where the US just flat out broke treaties, or bribed one chief to sell off his whole tribe's land when it wasn't even clear he had that authority. Even if he did, there's a moral issue about taking the land that way. And if none of those strategies worked, sometimes the settlers would just kill everyone in the indigenous village: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnadenhutten_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnadenhutten_massacre Manhattan Beach, CA stole a piece of land from a black family through eminent domain in the early 20th Century. They just recently made things right and came to a settlement with the family. Better late than never.