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

141–150 of 264 posts

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#141

Post by Mediterraneo10 »

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…

In the wake of the French Revolution, the hyper-centralist French state, with an Enlightenment-era dislike of diversity and a fondness for "standardization", deliberately eradicated lots of cultural diversity within France -- the Breton and Occitan languages were nearly driven extinct, and Basque's survival is much less assured than on the Spanish side of the border. Were Canada still a French possession, that Parisian chauvinism may well have impacted Canada all the same.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#142

Post by throwanem »

hhernandez wrote: post #130
throwanem wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or your local BLM protest. The Brookings Institution has a good survey of the relevant history, here: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/02/27/examining...

Why does that article not address the most dominant cause of the wealth gap, which is broken homes and blacks dropping out of school, not going to college etc? That's an issue of personal choices more than anything else.

I'd ask for a citation, but I know you're arguing in bad faith. If you were here for an honest debate, you'd act like it.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#143

Post by Tiktaalik »

paloaltokid wrote: post #133
ifokiedoke wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[flagged]

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#144

Post by rexpop »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #138
rexpop wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> I don't think GP asserted that the U.S.'s claims were any more valid.

They've left it up to our imagination what they think is valid.

Edit: After reflecting on your response, I've taken out the offending line.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#145

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #140
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.

By what right did the the land belong to the native Americans? Do you think all the native tribes spilled out of Alaska and then neatly fitted themselves into mutually-recognized non-overlapping territories never to be disturbed?

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#146

Post by pbiggar »

paloaltokid wrote: post #134
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?

I took Westphalian to refer to the concept of the "nation state", which--at least in the west--is regarded to have been created at the Treaty of Westphalia.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#147

Post by fennecfoxen »

sxv wrote: post #103
fennecfoxen wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so simple. Kind of hard to run a farm and grow your food when "land belongs to all". And who'd be stupid enough to put up a building on land they don't own?

I think you are suffering from "I can't imagine how things could work differently because I only know how things work currently". Where I am located, on the coast of Ecuador, most land is collectively owned by the "comuna", or a group of local villagers. They sell temporary land-use permits (usufruct) but the land will always belong to the comuna. I can still build on it with the understanding that I would only pass…

There are many different ways things could work! Some of them work better than others. I'm aware of this particular way already, as it turns out. It's as simple as the community, which is to say, it's not simple at all, and incredibly prone to cliqueishness.

And if the land very much does not belong to "all". It does not belong to me. It does not belong to the immigrant. It belongs to a rough local equivalent of a suburban HOA.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#148

Post by thex10 »

hhernandez wrote: post #68
throwanem wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concept of a colorblind approach ignores the existence of historical context. One might as well take a disability-blind approach to whether buildings need wheelchair ramps.

People today are generally not limited by the historical context from which they come. Your parents' individual personalities and ability to raise you does matter, but broader historical context matters very little, unless we try to make it so and that generally just causes conflict. People in wheelchairs are on the other hand affected by the presence or absence of wheelchair ramps.

> Your parents' individual personalities and ability to raise you does matter, but broader historical context matters very little

Broader historical context plays part in what defines your parents' personalities and ability to raise children in the first place. You're trying so very hard to abstract it away in order to solve this problem but many of us know this won't work.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#149

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

faitswulff wrote: post #123

A lot of comments arguing about the specifics of land ownership in this thread. I think the point of the website is that it's not our land unless you're indigenous.

Do the Alaskan natives own their land? I ask because they represent a separate and later migration. The original Alaskan natives are no longer around to dispute the matter as they were replaced by those who now are now called indigenous. This is reflected in their languages, which are unrelated to other indigenous languages in North and South America.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#150

Post by jtr1 »

paloaltokid wrote: post #133
ifokiedoke wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It takes a pretty impoverished understanding of evolution to write off cooperation and symbiosis as strategies for passing on ones genes.
Post reply on HN