5 ms·
I don't think I'm strongly pushing any particular position -- I think the author is, and I'm asking why. Basically, what makes this particular story of human s
by b6 12y ago
I don't think I'm strongly pushing any particular position -- I think the author is, and I'm asking why.
Basically, what makes this particular story of human savagery, out of all of them, crucial right now? If it's high time for Americans to acknowledge that the US is built on someone else's land, is it also time for everyone else in every other country to do the same thing? Is there any country whose borders don't include territory that used to belong to people of some other ethnicity or culture?
Are we even sure we understand how to determine who really owns what piece of land? I'm genuinely asking. It seems very basic, but I don't know how to answer it.
Please note, I'm not trying to claim that any particular instance of violence was alright because everybody else was being violent too. Without a doubt, it was appalling, atrocious savagery, and will hopefully never be repeated. It's just that, in the field of appalling, atrocious savagery, there's a lot of competition.
- sveme 12y agoBut isn't "same old, same old" a dangerous position? I understand what you are saying, there have constantly been wars in every possible inhabitable area, everywhere in the world and especially at the end of the 19th century. So the US is not special in that respect. But the outside view of the US is that they deem themselves special - the shining beacon on the hill - a narrative that cannot be accommodated with its history. Germany had to come to terms with its past, acknowledge its past, is it too much to ask American citizens to do that as well, and continue onwards with a little more humbleness? The history of the US is not particularly nasty in comparison to other countries' histories, but it is not particularly exemplary as well.