11 ms·

So long as you give them their entire claim to land as a sovereign nation, including water, mineral, and air space rights… And at that point you don’t have muc

So long as you give them their entire claim to land as a sovereign nation, including water, mineral, and air space rights… And at that point you don’t have much space for the colonial powers left.

DrThunder 3y ago
Name one other nation in the history of the world that has given any consideration at all to the people who's land they took. Indians were stealing land from each other for generations before "colonialism" was a thing. It's just part of human history. Time to move on, they're certainly not getting much societal benefit from government gifted land. It's only served to isolate them more and impoverish their communities. Instead of integrating they continue to live in a past that no longer exists. Either they're Americans or they're not.
nemo44x 3y ago
Why would anyone give up land they conquered if they want to live on it? No one has a right to land outside of borders they can't defend. If you can't defend a border then you aren't a sovereign nation. You're a group of people that need to work with the sovereign nation to allow you to live on the land they conquered.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Why would anyone give up land they conquered if they want to live on it? To avoid being evil? To be the sort of people who keeps promises?
- maxwell 3y ago
  Wabanakis also fought the British and maintained their freedom. https://www.penobscothistory.com/historic-preservation/12-tribal-chiefs/10-joseph-orono https://www.penobscothistory.com/historic-preservation/12-tr... The Penobscot Nation, the oldest government in the Western hemisphere, has never been conquered.
- GlassOwAter 3y ago
  Where do you live? I bet I can conquer your house.
  - potatolicious 3y ago
    So many people have this delusion that, in a Mad-Max-ian world they'd be a badass sitting on the bones of their enemies when in fact they'd just be dead in a ditch somewhere. There's a pretty vocal minority on HN (and in tech generally) that are unapologetic supporters of might-makes-right and wholly against the rule of law. It's at least a bit refreshing from the usual set of people who are against the same but too mealy-mouthed to say it outright.
    - nemo44x 3y ago
      The rule of law is might makes right. Who makes the law? Who enforces it?
      - maxwell 3y ago
        The people, in the U.S. We can strike down any federal statute, call a convention, and simply dissolve the federal government and create a new one whenever popularly desired. There's no monopoly on arms in this country. Every able-bodied male between 17 and 45 is in the militia and we keep a gun behind every blade of grass.
  - jaywalk 3y ago
    A house is not a sovereign nation.
  - nemo44x 3y ago
    I’m sure you can’t. The sovereign nation I live under has laws and the ability to enforce them that protect my property. If you tried to take my house then I’d have a tort against you. The nation would find in my favor and imprison you. My home would remain my property.
- yawpitch 3y ago
  The concept of all three of borders, nations, and sovereignty as you’re using it are relatively recent innovations that haven’t survived for anywhere near as long as, for example, feudalism did as an organizing structure, and just as feudalism died this latest iteration of “my might makes me right” will, eventually, die as well. If it takes the species with it, so be it.
  - fluoridation 3y ago
    It seems to me that might makes right is at least as old as humanity itself. I don't see many animals organizing to resolve disputes peacefully. When it comes to relations between groups that do not engage socially with each other, might makes right seems like the default means to come to agreements.
    - yawpitch 3y ago
      Child molestation is also at least as old as humanity itself... you have not made a sensible or reasoned argument for continuing to do what we did in the past.
      - fluoridation 3y ago
        It's not an argument in favor of continuing to do it. It's an argument against the idea that it will stop happening in the future.
        yawpitch 3y ago
        It will absolutely stop happening in the future… the only question is will it have stopped because we finally outgrew thinking with our genitals, or will it have stopped because we failed to do so?
        fluoridation 3y ago
        Yes, it will only stop when there no longer people to do it. We are in agreement in that.
ImJamal 3y ago
Who are we going to give it to? Tribe A who the colonists took it from? What about the Tribe B that had their taken by the Tribe A? Should they be screwed over?
- maxwell 3y ago
  Without the European conquest, the Wabanakis may have actually been crushed by the expanding Iroquois Confederacy. Hence they, along with other Algonquin nations, joined the Americans in the Revolution, while many Iroquois sided with the British. The Penobscots, one of the member nations of the Wabanaki Confederacy, have never been displaced from Indian Island (since settling there ~11k years ago), and acquired significant additional land holdings since the 1970s.
  - ImJamal 3y ago
    >The Penobscots, one of the member nations of the Wabanaki Confederacy, have never been displaced from Indian Island (since settling there ~11k years ago), and acquired significant additional land holdings since the 1970s. How do you know that? If they took land from another tribe 9k years ago do you think we would have a record of it? What if another tribe took the land from them 8k years ago and 7k years ago they took it back? Do you think we can actually determine if that happened?
    - maxwell 3y ago
      Uh, what do you think we can "actually determine" from before recorded history? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9th_millennium_BC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9th_millennium_BC I used to live on the next island over (French Island), and your clueless questioning of Penobscot sovereignty is disappointing. Would you also suggest that maybe Natufians should control the Levant?
      - ImJamal 3y ago
        >Uh, what do you think we can "actually determine" from before recorded history? That is my point. You made a claim but have no evidence to prove it. >I used to live on the next island over (French Island), and your clueless questioning of Penobscot sovereignty is disappointing. I don't think you understand what my point even is if you think I am doubting anybody's sovereignty. >Would you also suggest that maybe Natufians should control the Levant? I don't think being the earliest inhabitants of an area gives permanent ownership. My issue is we are told we need to give back land to the previous owners. It just seems ridiculous that we should do that when many of the tribes we took the land from did the exact same thing we did.

DrThunder 3y ago

Name one other nation in the history of the world that has given any consideration at all to the people who's land they took. Indians were stealing land from each other for generations before "colonialism" was a thing. It's just part of human history. Time to move on, they're certainly not getting much societal benefit from government gifted land. It's only served to isolate them more and impoverish their communities. Instead of integrating they continue to live in a past that no longer exists. Either they're Americans or they're not.

nemo44x 3y ago

Why would anyone give up land they conquered if they want to live on it? No one has a right to land outside of borders they can't defend. If you can't defend a border then you aren't a sovereign nation. You're a group of people that need to work with the sovereign nation to allow you to live on the land they conquered.

JohnFen 3y ago
> Why would anyone give up land they conquered if they want to live on it? To avoid being evil? To be the sort of people who keeps promises?
maxwell 3y ago
Wabanakis also fought the British and maintained their freedom. https://www.penobscothistory.com/historic-preservation/12-tribal-chiefs/10-joseph-orono https://www.penobscothistory.com/historic-preservation/12-tr... The Penobscot Nation, the oldest government in the Western hemisphere, has never been conquered.
GlassOwAter 3y ago
Where do you live? I bet I can conquer your house.
- potatolicious 3y ago
  So many people have this delusion that, in a Mad-Max-ian world they'd be a badass sitting on the bones of their enemies when in fact they'd just be dead in a ditch somewhere. There's a pretty vocal minority on HN (and in tech generally) that are unapologetic supporters of might-makes-right and wholly against the rule of law. It's at least a bit refreshing from the usual set of people who are against the same but too mealy-mouthed to say it outright.
  - nemo44x 3y ago
    The rule of law is might makes right. Who makes the law? Who enforces it?
    - maxwell 3y ago
      The people, in the U.S. We can strike down any federal statute, call a convention, and simply dissolve the federal government and create a new one whenever popularly desired. There's no monopoly on arms in this country. Every able-bodied male between 17 and 45 is in the militia and we keep a gun behind every blade of grass.
- jaywalk 3y ago
  A house is not a sovereign nation.
- nemo44x 3y ago
  I’m sure you can’t. The sovereign nation I live under has laws and the ability to enforce them that protect my property. If you tried to take my house then I’d have a tort against you. The nation would find in my favor and imprison you. My home would remain my property.
yawpitch 3y ago
The concept of all three of borders, nations, and sovereignty as you’re using it are relatively recent innovations that haven’t survived for anywhere near as long as, for example, feudalism did as an organizing structure, and just as feudalism died this latest iteration of “my might makes me right” will, eventually, die as well. If it takes the species with it, so be it.
- fluoridation 3y ago
  It seems to me that might makes right is at least as old as humanity itself. I don't see many animals organizing to resolve disputes peacefully. When it comes to relations between groups that do not engage socially with each other, might makes right seems like the default means to come to agreements.
  - yawpitch 3y ago
    Child molestation is also at least as old as humanity itself... you have not made a sensible or reasoned argument for continuing to do what we did in the past.
    - fluoridation 3y ago
      It's not an argument in favor of continuing to do it. It's an argument against the idea that it will stop happening in the future.
      - yawpitch 3y ago
        It will absolutely stop happening in the future… the only question is will it have stopped because we finally outgrew thinking with our genitals, or will it have stopped because we failed to do so?
        fluoridation 3y ago
        Yes, it will only stop when there no longer people to do it. We are in agreement in that.

ImJamal 3y ago

Who are we going to give it to? Tribe A who the colonists took it from? What about the Tribe B that had their taken by the Tribe A? Should they be screwed over?

maxwell 3y ago
Without the European conquest, the Wabanakis may have actually been crushed by the expanding Iroquois Confederacy. Hence they, along with other Algonquin nations, joined the Americans in the Revolution, while many Iroquois sided with the British. The Penobscots, one of the member nations of the Wabanaki Confederacy, have never been displaced from Indian Island (since settling there ~11k years ago), and acquired significant additional land holdings since the 1970s.
- ImJamal 3y ago
  >The Penobscots, one of the member nations of the Wabanaki Confederacy, have never been displaced from Indian Island (since settling there ~11k years ago), and acquired significant additional land holdings since the 1970s. How do you know that? If they took land from another tribe 9k years ago do you think we would have a record of it? What if another tribe took the land from them 8k years ago and 7k years ago they took it back? Do you think we can actually determine if that happened?
  - maxwell 3y ago
    Uh, what do you think we can "actually determine" from before recorded history? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9th_millennium_BC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9th_millennium_BC I used to live on the next island over (French Island), and your clueless questioning of Penobscot sovereignty is disappointing. Would you also suggest that maybe Natufians should control the Levant?
    - ImJamal 3y ago
      >Uh, what do you think we can "actually determine" from before recorded history? That is my point. You made a claim but have no evidence to prove it. >I used to live on the next island over (French Island), and your clueless questioning of Penobscot sovereignty is disappointing. I don't think you understand what my point even is if you think I am doubting anybody's sovereignty. >Would you also suggest that maybe Natufians should control the Levant? I don't think being the earliest inhabitants of an area gives permanent ownership. My issue is we are told we need to give back land to the previous owners. It just seems ridiculous that we should do that when many of the tribes we took the land from did the exact same thing we did.