i support indigenous language revitalization and you can too by contributing knowledge or donating to https://www.endangeredlanguages.com
|
|
# ? Sep 17, 2022 17:16 |
|
|
# ? Jun 13, 2024 06:12 |
|
Pretendian, lol. Elizabeth Warren is indigenous to Ireland but St Patrick drove her ancestors out.
|
# ? Sep 18, 2022 11:03 |
|
https://twitter.com/ryanlcooper/status/1573320371381719041 I know this is just a random dude from twitter but posts like this are so baffling to see from self anointed leftists.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 04:01 |
|
"extermine the french in saigon" is the same as the trail of tears
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 04:07 |
|
how about giving them what was actually agreed to in treaties for starters, is that also blood and soil nationalism?
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 04:27 |
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:https://twitter.com/ryanlcooper/status/1573320371381719041 leftist will tell the hereditary chief to go gently caress himself if he comes asking for the keys to their parcel of his unceded territory.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 04:42 |
|
Aw heck Gikagawe, y'know I'd love to sign over my mortgage but this is more of a uh, a structural problem? And I feel like maybe I'm being responsibilized for the settler-colonial state, which I did not vote for. But I definitely support what you're going for here.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 04:49 |
|
when i was a kid living (as a white dude) in an indigenous community and making some very early observations about both my local context, the broader settler colonialist state i live in and the biggest current efforts worldwide like Israel and even then i categorized "giving significant valuable chunks of land back to the people who originally lived here" as the kind of utter impossibility that could never ever be remotely politically viable. people will not vote away their property and most indigenous populations are the minority. nunavut is kind of an example of colonialist states giving sovereignty back to indigenous people but it also kind of taught me the pragmatic limitations of what the state would tolerate there. it has to be more or less worthless, you have to have some ulterior motive to encourage people live and govern there like enforcing canadian sovereignty over disputed arctic territories, and whatever treaty arranged must ensure that whatever power given is inherently too limited to allow any kind of radical action and that any valuable resource extraction is still available to capital if it ever becomes viable to exploit to their profit. see the mineral rights clauses of the land claim agreement. that was 20 years ago and tbh as much as a lot of things i thought back then were total poo poo i think that one has some merit.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 05:00 |
|
CoolCab posted:when i was a kid living (as a white dude) in an indigenous community and making some very early observations about both my local context, the broader settler colonialist state i live in and the biggest current efforts worldwide like Israel and even then i categorized "giving significant valuable chunks of land back to the people who originally lived here" as the kind of utter impossibility that could never ever be remotely politically viable. people will not vote away their property and most indigenous populations are the minority. i have a professor of native america that likes to share his "hot take" that indian removal was jackson's least bad option because otherwise the there would have been a civil war the government would have lost and/or the georgians would have murdered every last person regardless
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 05:04 |
|
Yes. See also the Nisga'a and the Nass Valley. I'm genuinely loving stoked for what they achieved but also it's no surprise why they were able to achieve what they did, relative to nations in the economically valuable lower mainland.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 05:05 |
|
CoolCab posted:when i was a kid living (as a white dude) in an indigenous community and making some very early observations about both my local context, the broader settler colonialist state i live in and the biggest current efforts worldwide like Israel and even then i categorized "giving significant valuable chunks of land back to the people who originally lived here" as the kind of utter impossibility that could never ever be remotely politically viable. people will not vote away their property and most indigenous populations are the minority. eyoo speaking on this does anyone have a writeup of the implications and practical implementations of the recent tulsa case??
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 05:21 |
|
Also a lot of the political energy of indigenous land return is coming from extractive corporations, who feel that stealing their resources and labor would be easier without the meager protections the US government provides.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 18:30 |
|
The Atomic Man-Boy posted:Also a lot of the political energy of indigenous land return is coming from extractive corporations, who feel that stealing their resources and labor would be easier without the meager protections the US government provides. If there is collected evidence of this I would be curious to see it. I know that there's a long history of "turn Indigenous land into private property so they will become dedicated capitalists."
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 18:42 |
|
The Atomic Man-Boy posted:Also a lot of the political energy of indigenous land return is coming from extractive corporations, who feel that stealing their resources and labor would be easier without the meager protections the US government provides. While I don't doubt that there are some corporations who think it's easier to just deal with indigenous tribes like this why wouldn't these corporations just work with governments that are already pretty friendly with them? re: land back The big issue with the progressive sloganeering that has gotten popular is that they don't really mean anything in particular and are very easy to coopt. To me the land back movement is nothing more than a new spin on decolonization. For the time being though I think that demanding every piece of federal land back, and forcing the US government to adhere to treaties are both pretty reasonable demands.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 18:58 |
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:For the time being though I think that demanding every piece of federal land back, and forcing the US government to adhere to treaties are both pretty reasonable demands. I maybe have overstated when I said “a lot of the energy” and I agree, but I’m just saying that returning lands will be insufficient without a large rollback of corporate power.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 19:18 |
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:The big issue with the progressive sloganeering that has gotten popular is that they don't really mean anything in particular and are very easy to coopt. To me the land back movement is nothing more than a new spin on decolonization. Every bit of language and articulation of demands is something that can be repeated in the service of people with no serious anti-colonial politics. After all, that's how words work: you can always just say them. And so we get the Clinton campaign blathering about intersectionality or university HR offices being decolonial. I don't think there's any piece of language that's inherently immune to that. But, on the other hand, the clearer the articulation and the more directly language links to demands, the harder it is to fully co-opt. It's a lot harder for a bank to invoke "land back" because it's easy to look at that and ask "well, where's the land going?" So yeah nothing is immune but some articulations are better than others.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2022 19:31 |
|
Hand Knit posted:Every bit of language and articulation of demands is something that can be repeated in the service of people with no serious anti-colonial politics. After all, that's how words work: you can always just say them. And so we get the Clinton campaign blathering about intersectionality or university HR offices being decolonial. I don't think there's any piece of language that's inherently immune to that. But, on the other hand, the clearer the articulation and the more directly language links to demands, the harder it is to fully co-opt. It's a lot harder for a bank to invoke "land back" because it's easy to look at that and ask "well, where's the land going?" Oh absolutely, i'm sure that there are demands. I know that during the BLM protests local organizations had some pretty concrete demands as well. I was just an idiot and completely forgot about that while making that post. I recently learned about the Osage murders, where a bunch of white settlers married into the tribe and then killed their partners and children for the mineral rights they owned. The predecessor to the FBI "handled" the case and put the blame on a handful of serial killers. There were over 50+ murders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osage_Indian_murders
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 01:37 |
|
I want the US to give land back to the indigenous nations. The only issue is people treat you like a liberal imperialist for asking for what that would actually look like. Ex: unlimited shrimp posted:Aw heck Gikagawe, y'know I'd love to sign over my mortgage but this is more of a uh, a structural problem? And I feel like maybe I'm being responsibilized for the settler-colonial state, which I did not vote for. But I definitely support what you're going for here. Give your house to an indigenous guy and impoverish yourself or you're a settler (you're still a settler if you give the house back). Like what is actually being proposed? Honoring all of the treaties (to the extent physically possible) that the US signed with tribes? That doesn't seem like enough, to be honest. Give indigenous people sovereignty and governance over that land? Sure, but we need to reckon with the fact that within the land they are legally owed indigenous people are a minority. So is everyone else enfranchised? What stops people from just voting to re-stablish colonial power relations? In addition many of the lands themselves are sorely in need of investment in, for example, infrastructure; that would be greatly benefitted by the shared resource base of the continent. Going maximum demands gently caress yt gently caress colonizers is the radlib position. Saying that doing anything is too maximalist is the lib position. unwantedplatypus has issued a correction as of 15:48 on Sep 29, 2022 |
# ? Sep 29, 2022 15:38 |
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:Oh absolutely, i'm sure that there are demands. I know that during the BLM protests local organizations had some pretty concrete demands as well. I was just an idiot and completely forgot about that while making that post. just read through that wiki article and it's incredibly hosed up
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 17:12 |
|
Hand Knit posted:If there is collected evidence of this I would be curious to see it. I know that there's a long history of "turn Indigenous land into private property so they will become dedicated capitalists." Alaska is a striking example of this. Indigenous-led Fortune 500 oil company https://www.asrc.com/
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 17:47 |
|
shwinnebego posted:Alaska is a striking example of this. Indigenous-led Fortune 500 oil company https://www.asrc.com/ I was going to say something about how in a hypothetical landback society, the rise of an indigenous bourgeoisie that will have (more or less) the exact same relationship with the land and its people as the colonizers is a concern. However it felt a little gauche considering the actual situation of deprivation and poverty for the majority. But LOL that its a real thing.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 17:50 |
|
that's why a one-world government with no jurisdictional differences is the only ethical option
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 17:57 |
|
i say swears online posted:that's why a one-world government with no jurisdictional differences is the only ethical option
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 18:26 |
|
unwantedplatypus posted:I want the US to give land back to the indigenous nations. The only issue is people treat you like a liberal imperialist for asking for what that would actually look like. the easiest first step would be a government fund to repurchase reservations lands lost to checker boarding
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 18:33 |
|
"land back", like "abolish the police" are revolutionary demands because the current system fundamentally cannot deliver on them, to the extent that you can't even really use them as a maximal bargaining position because it can't even be on the table -- if you had the leverage to execute on giving stolen land back or abolishing the police why not just kick off the revolution and seize total control? land back and abolish the police can both be decomposed into concrete and maybe-possibly-kinda realizable goals that might even be possible to achieve, but at that point, what's the use? Sloganeering? I have a hard time you're going to get more people on your side, and importantly a harder time getting organizers serious about these realizable goals, with a demand you know to be impossible. I don't know, to me all of these maximal positions just turn into liberal coopted lip service. Land acknowledgements and moments of silence for police murders before the HR meeting about why you'll get fired if you even think about the word "union"
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 18:36 |
|
shwinnebego posted:Alaska is a striking example of this. Indigenous-led Fortune 500 oil company https://www.asrc.com/ See also: Casinos on native reservations, also Wackenhut, which for the uninitiated, was a CIA corporation on the Cabazon which trafficking arms, chemical weapons, and all sorts of other shady poo poo around Iran-Contra.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 18:41 |
Pentecoastal Elites posted:"land back", like "abolish the police" are revolutionary demands because the current system fundamentally cannot deliver on them, to the extent that you can't even really use them as a maximal bargaining position because it can't even be on the table -- if you had the leverage to execute on giving stolen land back or abolishing the police why not just kick off the revolution and seize total control? lol
|
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 19:11 |
|
CoolCab posted:... i categorized "giving significant valuable chunks of land back to the people who originally lived here" as the kind of utter impossibility that could never ever be remotely politically viable. people will not vote away their property and most indigenous populations are the minority. Respectfully, this is horseshit, and I would direct you to the New Zealand example. You probably need a population that's not incredibly racist first, but that's the obstacle not some property rights BS. If our financially overstretched government can compensate people I'm guessing Canada and the USA could too. AnimeIsTrash posted:For the time being though I think that demanding every piece of federal land back, and forcing the US government to adhere to treaties are both pretty reasonable demands. Do you genuinely believe it's reasonable to give 28% of the land in the USA to less than 2% of the population?
|
# ? Sep 29, 2022 23:58 |
|
Weka posted:Do you genuinely believe it's reasonable to give 28% of the land in the USA to less than 2% of the population?
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 03:13 |
|
?
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 03:21 |
|
ted hitler hunter posted:Of course you give it back. It's their land they're supposed to own it. Who is "they"
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 03:21 |
|
try and conceptualize it this way.. land back is completely and mutually exclusive with the existence of the USA. from there its anybodys guess how it will shake out
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 04:52 |
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Who is "they" You do know that tribes are political organizations, right? And often political organization that had distinct boundaries that were promised actual pieces of land by treaty that the US just reneged on because its bourgeois wanted to make money? We could start with that. Or you can just give it to me and gently caress off back to Europe, things are going swimmingly there at the moment.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 05:00 |
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:land back is completely and mutually exclusive with the existence of the USA. now we're talkin
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 05:15 |
|
The Atomic Man-Boy posted:You do know that tribes are political organizations, right? And often political organization that had distinct boundaries that were promised actual pieces of land by treaty that the US just reneged on because its bourgeois wanted to make money? We could start with that. sorry but my ethnicity is now "american" instead of scotch-irish
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 05:28 |
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Who is "they"
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 06:23 |
|
croup coughfield posted:now we're talkin
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 06:33 |
|
Landback is impossible in a capitalist society so this is all just a thought experiment. The obvious thing to do would be to honor the treaties but it certainly would be possible to go beyond that. I'm on Cheyenne land and I rent in my ideal world my lease just goes to the Cheyenne nation and not my landlord and nothing would really change. A large part of that though is how loving large America is idk what the specifics would be but lets say they want all the whites out the federal government could just resettle people and compensate them doesnt seem to hard, the federal government has relocated people before.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 06:40 |
|
Tell it to my local tribe with over a billion in assets, including a bunch of land with more probably on the way.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 07:56 |
|
|
# ? Jun 13, 2024 06:12 |
|
Weka posted:Tell it to my local tribe with over a billion in assets, including a bunch of land with more probably on the way. why will they be getting more land? repurchasing at market rate?
|
# ? Sep 30, 2022 08:06 |