Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

whose.land

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 264 posts

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#131

Post by rexpop »

rukittenme wrote: post #79
majormajor wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From a certain perspective, all of human history can be summed up as an endless series of blood feuds. Is it so bad that people think we should try to do better? In my history classes I learned about Europe - itself very much in flux as you mention through the past thousand years - being "invaded" and America being "settled." Things need to be properly acknowledged before they can be moved past. And some of these t…

> Things need to be properly acknowledged before they can be moved past. What acknowledgement would right the wrongs of history? What is the appropriate amount of reparations to be paid?

Is "None" the answer that would satisfy you? You seem to be implying a slippery slope, but you come off as saying "what's non-trivial shouldn't be attempted."

If you're actually interested in answering that very big question–which, I suspect, you might not be, only ornery and combative–you would do well to read what scholars have written on it. You might even Google the simplest component of the subject.

Here is a start: "US approves $4.5 billion in reparations to Indians, black farmers"[0]

0. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/301242

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#132

Post by s1artibartfast »

idontwantit wrote: post #56
chrisco255 wrote: post #27

The idea of the stable borders is so new. The Ottoman Empire still controlled much of the middle east before World War I. The British Empire was also still quite expansive at the beginning of that war (and into WW2). The fact that so much of the world speaks Latin-derived languages (French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, Italian...nearly 1 billion people in total) is a relic of the Roman empire's own expansive conque…

The examples of early natives torturing an executing people is a strange choice here. Readers, don't forget that these people are the contemporaries of the perpetrators of chattel slavery, and the french revolution, to name a few popular examples. The sordid atrocities committed all around the Americas by indigenous Europeans are very well-documented and continued beyond the 18th century, legitimized by the US societ…

I don't think the intent was to draw a comparison between contemporary native americans and those of the 18th century. Instead, I think it serves to demonstrate that atrocious behavior is not exclusive to the european settlers.

This is relevant to some moral analyses.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#133

Post by paloaltokid »

ifokiedoke wrote: post #71
waffle_ss wrote: post #63

Human history is a story of conquest, and Native Americans fought - fought , not rolled over on their bellies - and were conquered by white settlers. It might not have been a very fair fight given the disparity in technology but it was a fight nonetheless. The natives were certainly fighting each other before whites arrived, too - the warrior role is an important part of many tribes' culture. Should the Comanche give…

While I understand this sentiment - especially since as you say, most (if not all) of today's accepted states and borders are the result of bloody, unfair conquest - I do personally struggle with a system of objection/dismissal based on the "well, it's a dog-eats-world" mindset. Interestingly, I've also found that many people (I'm being a bit hand-wavy here, I know) who are completely fine with dismissing indigenous…

> I do personally struggle with a system of objection/dismissal based on the "well, it's a dog-eats-world" mindset.

I used to be perplexed by these responses on HN as well but they make a certain kind of sense. If you have really doubled down on science and evolution and take them to their logical extreme, Darwinism really does just reduce to "if I can eat you, I win."

It occurs to me that many posters on HN are very okay with this mindset because they are chasing big dreams in life. And if a few people get hurt while they're on their way to riches, so be it.

You see this sentiment all the time in various comment threads.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#134

Post by paloaltokid »

simonsarris wrote: post #4

Somehow I doubt the Russians, English, Spanish, French etc that arrived in the Americas landed on a Westphalian continent. I think maps like this give the wrong impression. Wabanaki (among others) invited French colonists to settle Quebec in part to check (and perhaps attack) the Mohawk, among other conflicts. ex: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver_Wars I think it is almost universally agreed that the French treate…

> a Westphalian continent.

I know the reference you're making here, but for other readers who may not know the history, can you elaborate a bit please?

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#135

Post by minerjoe »

hhernandez wrote: post #128
minerjoe wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, go visit the Pine Ridge Reservation and then come back here and say "prople today are generally not limited by the historical context from which they come. Or the Standing Rock reservation, or ...

The reservations themselves are responsible for the deplorable state of the people living on them. If the Natives had integrated a few generations ago they would be far better off today.

Dude, I'm sorry for you.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#136

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

rexpop wrote: post #124
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #117

Maps like these give the false impression that nearly every square mile of land - even inhospitable desert regions, were once occupied by some native polity. Reality check: Most indigenous peoples lived in Mesoamerica, with < 10 million in what is now USA/Canada and that's being generous. There are regions of North America today that have no residents. By what grounds are these native lands - because some nomads once…

For one thing, it's incredibly chauvinistic to dismiss pre-colombian society as "some nomads," and their mobility patterns as having "wandered". Nomadic life-ways aren't the thoughtless ramblings of a child at play, or a sub-sentient beast in simple reactionary pursuit of greener pastures. They summer here, winter there, raise children in these parts, and visit those for sport, trade, or agriculture. Their relationsh…

>Nomadic life-ways aren't the thoughtless ramblings of a child at play

In 11th century eastern europe, Kipchaq nomads did the same - "wandering" as in following seasonal patterns within their lands. But it was not until the 17th century that the steppes were settled - and the settlers weren't Kipchaqs.

Imagine if a modern day Ukrainian was presented with a similar indigenous map based on nomadic groups that once roamed his country - it would stretch from the Danube to the Volga! Should we convert the entire pontic-caspian steppe into an indigenous zones for Nogais and Tatars who are related to the historical kipchaqs?

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#138

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

rexpop wrote: post #124
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #117

Maps like these give the false impression that nearly every square mile of land - even inhospitable desert regions, were once occupied by some native polity. Reality check: Most indigenous peoples lived in Mesoamerica, with < 10 million in what is now USA/Canada and that's being generous. There are regions of North America today that have no residents. By what grounds are these native lands - because some nomads once…

For one thing, it's incredibly chauvinistic to dismiss pre-colombian society as "some nomads," and their mobility patterns as having "wandered". Nomadic life-ways aren't the thoughtless ramblings of a child at play, or a sub-sentient beast in simple reactionary pursuit of greener pastures. They summer here, winter there, raise children in these parts, and visit those for sport, trade, or agriculture. Their relationsh…

> And by what grounds are they the Bureau of Land Management's?

You may be accidentally engaging in a form of whataboutism.

The GP questioned whose.land's standards when drawing the borders. But I don't think GP asserted that the U.S.'s claims were any more valid.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#139

Post by [deleted] »

Miner49er wrote: post #80
waffle_ss wrote: post #63

Human history is a story of conquest, and Native Americans fought - fought , not rolled over on their bellies - and were conquered by white settlers. It might not have been a very fair fight given the disparity in technology but it was a fight nonetheless. The natives were certainly fighting each other before whites arrived, too - the warrior role is an important part of many tribes' culture. Should the Comanche give…

The simplest solution is that land ownership shouldn't exist. Land belongs to all.

[deleted]

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#140

Post by Tiktaalik »

Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #117

Maps like these give the false impression that nearly every square mile of land - even inhospitable desert regions, were once occupied by some native polity. Reality check: Most indigenous peoples lived in Mesoamerica, with < 10 million in what is now USA/Canada and that's being generous. There are regions of North America today that have no residents. By what grounds are these native lands - because some nomads once…

ah yeah "terra nullius", a pretty good excuse if you want to justify colonial occupation of lands that don't belong to you.

It's a horseshit excuse sorry.

Post reply on HN