4 ms·

> If someone wants to return parts of the US to the Cherokee, then we should also return much of Europe to the Picts 1. Land is not an object held in a museum

> If someone wants to return parts of the US to the Cherokee, then we should also return much of Europe to the Picts 1. Land is not an object held in a museum 2. There are over 300,000 enrolled tribal members of the Cherokee Nation (per Wikipedia). There are ~0 Picts, as far as I know. Obviously the effects of more recent rounds of conquest are more apparent and felt more keenly by those suffering as a result. > History happened. Let it be. Sure, but if someone wants to let it be, how long before we let the present turn into history? It's just raising the same question you dismissed!

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
AussieWog93 3y ago
>2. There are over 300,000 enrolled tribal members of the Cherokee Nation (per Wikipedia). There are ~0 Picts, as far as I know. Be careful with that logic! If we agree as a species that surviving conquered people have a right to reclaim their land and assets, but extinct ones don't, then the obvious course of action for the conquering force is to simply exterminate every native mercilessly.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  .. and that has happened more times than we talk about
- truculent 3y ago
  > If we agree as a species that surviving conquered people have a right to reclaim their land and assets, but extinct ones don't If?
sarchertech 3y ago
>There are over 300,000 enrolled tribal members of the Cherokee Nation (per Wikipedia). There are ~0 Picts, as far as I know. So what part of the US do we return to the Cherokee? The parts the US gave them when they forced them out of the South East? Or their original territory? My hometown was originally populated by a separate tribe. The Cherokee came later. How do we split the land between the Eastern and Western bands of Cherokee? To a large extent, the borders of the various tribes that are still existent today are a result of their interactions with the European colonial powers. So the "political map" of the US in 1794, looks vastly different than it did in 1720. The current map is entirely arbitrary and unfairly benefits some groups over others. But picking any other historical map is also entirely arbitrary. There's no way to go back and pick the "correct" one.
- truculent 3y ago
  > There's no way to go back and pick the "correct" one. Yes, exactly. All that’s left is politics: we have to make a choice, or a negotiation on how to proceed. My point is that pretending it’s all just “history” is just putting your head in the sand.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

AussieWog93 3y ago

>2. There are over 300,000 enrolled tribal members of the Cherokee Nation (per Wikipedia). There are ~0 Picts, as far as I know. Be careful with that logic! If we agree as a species that surviving conquered people have a right to reclaim their land and assets, but extinct ones don't, then the obvious course of action for the conquering force is to simply exterminate every native mercilessly.

mistrial9 3y ago
.. and that has happened more times than we talk about
truculent 3y ago
> If we agree as a species that surviving conquered people have a right to reclaim their land and assets, but extinct ones don't If?

sarchertech 3y ago

>There are over 300,000 enrolled tribal members of the Cherokee Nation (per Wikipedia). There are ~0 Picts, as far as I know. So what part of the US do we return to the Cherokee? The parts the US gave them when they forced them out of the South East? Or their original territory? My hometown was originally populated by a separate tribe. The Cherokee came later. How do we split the land between the Eastern and Western bands of Cherokee? To a large extent, the borders of the various tribes that are still existent today are a result of their interactions with the European colonial powers. So the "political map" of the US in 1794, looks vastly different than it did in 1720. The current map is entirely arbitrary and unfairly benefits some groups over others. But picking any other historical map is also entirely arbitrary. There's no way to go back and pick the "correct" one.

truculent 3y ago
> There's no way to go back and pick the "correct" one. Yes, exactly. All that’s left is politics: we have to make a choice, or a negotiation on how to proceed. My point is that pretending it’s all just “history” is just putting your head in the sand.