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

161–170 of 264 posts

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#161

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #153
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Indigenous people have been in NA for an extremely long time and have sorted themselves into nations over that time just like any where else in the world. If there are overlapping disagreements between Indigenous Nations about land title, as there are with all sorts of modern nations around the world, there are lots of modern mechanisms to settle that. Not sure how any of this has any relevance or should be used as a…

It seems like you are trying to avoid the question. What gives indigenous peoples any moral high ground over later settlers? The indigenous* conquered land from each other and moved - an obvious fact which too often gets left out of the conversation. Then, the Europeans came along and possessed the lands for themselves. And you'll find the same story repeated on every corner of the earth. Continual occupation is just not a thing.

* As I've mentioned in another comment, true "indigenous" Alaskans are no more, having been replaced by an unrelated group of people in a later migration to the Americas.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#162

Post by paloaltokid »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #143
paloaltokid wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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]

> Probably rich white dudes too.

Not necessarily. I've visited many different parts of the world and met many immigrants to this country. Race and affluence can compound these beliefs, but the drive to get ahead no matter the cost is very human and very universal. Being born in poverty is also not a guarantee that you will grow up to become an empathetic person either.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#163

Post by labster »

The title is wrong here, as the map includes Australia and some of South America.

I'm a little sad this doesn't include anything in Africa, Asia, or Europe. What about the Zulu Kingdom, conquered by the British? How about what Rome did to all of those Etruscans? What about the Uighurs and Tibetans?

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#164

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #153
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Indigenous people have been in NA for an extremely long time and have sorted themselves into nations over that time just like any where else in the world. If there are overlapping disagreements between Indigenous Nations about land title, as there are with all sorts of modern nations around the world, there are lots of modern mechanisms to settle that. Not sure how any of this has any relevance or should be used as a…

A critical component of those modern mechanisms is that land claims can be put to rest. That after a border's acknowledged for a long time, it becomes the border, and everyone has to respect it even if we can't condone the process that created it. Under a standard where territorial claims can be resurrected at any time - where Mexico can declare it owns California, and Britain can declare it owns the Eastern Seaboard, and the US can declare it owns Phillipines - modern mechanisms won't function.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#166

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

rexpop wrote: post #131
rukittenme wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 st…

Answers along the lines of "here's a start" are unsatisfying, because the question is where the end is. It's like asking what the ingredients for a loaf of bread are and hearing "well a tablespoon of flour is a start".

I'm not aware of any scholar who's said "after we do X, Y, Z, the wrongs of history will be righted and we won't need any further efforts to make it up to Native Americans". (If you know someone who did, I'd be excited to see what they have to say!)

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#167

Post by 0x8BADF00D »

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.

It is everyone’s land if it is not owned by a specific person or entity. That is what is referred to as the commons.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#168

Post by neonate »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #119
neonate wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking about hearing from the heart and not just in the technical sense that might say "Ok, you said your piece and I heard it, now can we just move on". I believe that most people won't respond dismissively to the suffering of others, if the conditions for hearing each other, really listening and acknowledging, are in place. But it's painful and we avoid those conditions as much as possible. For example, I hear…

how do you differentiate "hearing from the heart" and "agree with me and acquiesce to all remedies that I alone propose"?

To me that question sounds like asking how I differentiate "eating a pizza" and "petting a cat". They're obviously not the same.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#169

Post by Press2forEN »

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.

Even the land that was occupied by what we call "natives" was previously occupied by various flora and fauna. The previous settlers had no right to migrate to the area anymore than the Europeans did.

Re: Whose Land – Indigenous Nations of North America

#170

Post by lliamander »

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.

Does England not belong to the English, given that the Anglo-Saxons displaced the Celtic Britons during the middle ages?
Post reply on HN