|
There are alot of parallels between the public attitude toward Native Americans and the Israeli policies for the Palestinian territitories. Institutional racial chauvanism is present in many nations, it just isn't taken to the extreme example seen in Nazi Germany.
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 04:06 |
|
|
McDowell posted:There are alot of parallels between the public attitude toward Native Americans and the Israeli policies for the Palestinian territitories. Institutional racial chauvanism is present in many nations, it just isn't taken to the extreme example seen in Nazi Germany. It's of the same strain though. The USA is founded on genocide.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:So I guess the lesson to be learned is if you are going to ethnically cleanse do it right so people can write off the scattered survivors? But really, your callous dismissal of the native americans is kind of disgusting. You and the rest of the 2jivecrew missed the point. I wasn't comparing jews to Native Americans, I was comparing the number of holocaust museums to museums dedicated to the victims of that progressive reformer, Pol Pot.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:You and the rest of the 2jivecrew missed the point. I wasn't comparing jews to Native Americans, I was comparing the number of holocaust museums to museums dedicated to the victims of that progressive reformer, Pol Pot. No you weren't, you specifically mentioned "what happened 200+ years ago" meaning the beginning of Indian Removal. Are you just being purposefully disingenuous here?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Can I chime in as someone who's actually a teacher and has taught 1st graders about Native American's and pioneers? It's pretty easy to impart on even 1st graders that westward expansion came at the expense of Native Americans. Yes, even their fragile minds can recognize and understand that the NA's already lived on the land that Americans were claiming and being force-ably removed from/killed for it. The only "whitewashing" that goes on is that the lessons are really simple so no, we don't go into numbers and detail about how they were slaughtered, but they do understand that the pioneers were generally the "bad" people and Native American aggression was mostly justifiable.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Studying other trends, it kind of depends if the revolution fails or if it simply never gets round to happening. A hypothetical altreality where Britain ends the revolution and never goes further West than the Mississippi would probably result with Mexico as a reigning super power, with ports to both oceans, sizeable population, good climate, and bounty of natural resources. It'd depend on how stable the government could be in the long run but it would be very favorable. Britain would likely have to wage a second war against the colonists (as in real life) to put down the slaveocracy, but as a part of the greater British Empire I think you'd see less drive to push into the West and you wouldnt have Jefferson's "every man a yeoman king" mentality pushing people out west probably. I could see North America being overall weaker as it continues its status as proxy battleground for the European powers, which means the tribes are still a necessity to placate politically and that you don't see France selling half the continent off. Spain probably just still crawls into a corner and dies, but independent Mexico less likely to be an likely target of European powers. Basically a much more divided politically and linguistically North America with slavery ending a lot sooner.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:with ports to both oceans, sizeable population, good climate, and bounty of natural resources. Mexico already has three of these things(maybe not a bounty compared to the US, but at least more than many nations, namely oil and silver come to mind).
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Mexico already has three of these things(maybe not a bounty compared to the US, but at least more than many nations, namely oil and silver come to mind).
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Mexico already has three of these things(maybe not a bounty compared to the US, but at least more than many nations, namely oil and silver come to mind). Right, but the Mexican-American war saw Mexico losing almost half of the country (and ended up being some of the most resource rich parts) Mexico with the resources of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California is a lot different than modern Mexico.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:You and the rest of the 2jivecrew missed the point. I wasn't comparing jews to Native Americans, I was comparing the number of holocaust museums to museums dedicated to the victims of that progressive reformer, Pol Pot. Yeah as Berke Negri notes that wasn't your argument, sorry.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
Dude, if the US became a bunch of competing Balkan states in the 1820s, they would be shoving each other out of the way to kidder Indians and take their land. I don't buy slavery engine easier either. I won't defend the US policy as anything but genocidal, so many sources across so much time have outright called for the destruction Indians outright. For much of American history, that was the intent of just about any community that lived beside Indians.i don't think that would change if the British had been in charge, or there were competing smaller states.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Last Buffalo posted:Dude, if the US became a bunch of competing Balkan states in the 1820s, they would be shoving each other out of the way to kidder Indians and take their land. I don't buy slavery engine easier either.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
I just don't recall reading of any people until the 1880s of white Americans saying "whoa, all this blatant exploitation and murder is lovely. It's not cool." Sure, when the early colonists were living in somewhat equal proportions to the Indian communities around them, there were plenty of people who argued that they had to maintain proper balance and be good christians to the Natives. But once the power balance changed, I've never heard of anyone, save some missionaries, acting like American Indians deserved fair and equal treatment under the law.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:Yeah as Berke Negri notes that wasn't your argument, sorry. It was, even if expressed poorly. Let me say it a little slower; We have more Holocaust museums than Cambodian genocide museums because there is little Cambodian cultural influence in the US. What happened to the Native Americans was horrible, full stop. Blaming it on a single man or even a group of men is dumb and counterfactual, unless your group is "colonial Europeans" in which case I sure hope your righteous rage is mostly aimed at the Conquistadores in proportion to the body count for which they are responsible. I don't care what alt history to which you care to subscribe, Native North Americans fate were sealed the day Columbus 'discovered' the new world.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
You do realize that there are almost as many Native Americans (a people fundamentally out of the picture according to you!) as American Jews? I don't know where you get this idea that Native Americans are not a real part of American culture or society as countless foods, words, names for places/cities/states, the land come from Natives. If you are anywhere in the West land rights/use, water, etc. between tribal governments and US governments are still big issues to this day.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
What with all the comparisons of Ben Franklin being Goebbels or whatever, I'm curious how other world leaders fare? Like Do they gloss over how big of an rear end in a top hat Churchill was to Africans? And I remember reading somewhere about how Japan finally recognized the rape of Nanjing, but how do they deal with the atrocities they've committed? Is it comparable to how we educate people about our own atrocities?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Ethan_Alan posted:What with all the comparisons of Ben Franklin being Goebbels or whatever, I'm curious how other world leaders fare? Like Do they gloss over how big of an rear end in a top hat Churchill was to Africans? And I remember reading somewhere about how Japan finally recognized the rape of Nanjing, but how do they deal with the atrocities they've committed? Is it comparable to how we educate people about our own atrocities? I know for Mao the message the CCP allows is that while he was a great leader/general and had the right ideas, he was pretty bad at actually running the country and caused a fair amount of misery (actually criticizing the current CCP is still a big no-no though).
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I know for Mao the message the CCP allows is that while he was a great leader/general and had the right ideas, he was pretty bad at actually running the country and caused a fair amount of misery (actually criticizing the current CCP is still a big no-no though). Don't they say he was "70% good"? Using this metric I am willing to say that Thomas Jefferson was 12% good.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Don't they say he was "70% good"? Ha ah yeah guys Jefferson was way worse than Mao. Nobody said he's worse than hitler though!
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
e: nooothing
woke wedding drone fucked around with this message at 01:17 on May 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:You do realize that there are almost as many Native Americans (a people fundamentally out of the picture according to you!) as American Jews? God you're dense, I am sad for you and your children. The number of Native Americans alive today is utterly irrelevant. I live in Upstate NY and see their sad state of affairs on a regular basis, even though the tribes in this area are quantifiably better off than a lot of them in other places in the US. In fact if you want to learn something about interactions between colonists and natives go read about Sir William Johnson. That aside, there is a huge gap between the cultural and economic/political influence of Jews and Native Americans. Sorry you don't understand this.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:Ha ah yeah guys Jefferson was way worse than Mao. Nobody said he's worse than hitler though! Yeah that's really unfair, because Jefferson didn't have the opportunity to implement his ideas on the level that Mao did. Also, there were fewer Native Americans and blacks in the early 18th century US than there were Chinese in Maoist China, so it's not like he could have surpassed Mao even if he was straight-up playing for points.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Pauline, would you say the Constitution is a sufficiently well-crafted document, and that the authors' likely intent is a good basis for its legal interpretation?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
I'm actually having some difficulty parsing your argument out because you seem to be making multiple, possibly contradictory points. First, you claim that we should be judging Jefferson and other complicit founding fathers on the basis of their parochial interests related to the maintenance of the state. The you say that because they succeeded in this affair the morally questionable things they did should not be seriously questioned? Unrelated to this but still stated is your assertion that because jews have greater cultural influence we need more deference/sympathy to past transgressions committed against them? Is this an accurate summary of your argument so far?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
Pope Fabulous XXIV posted:Pauline, would you say the Constitution is a sufficiently well-crafted document, and that the authors' likely intent is a good basis for its legal interpretation? I suppose if by 'intent' you mean their writings and not what may have been in their heads but not written down, then I think the answer is that our system of lawmaking and jurisprudence does in fact lean on the founders' intent at times. As far as well crafted goes I'd say it's probably better than others of its era? I mean, it's no little red book.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Generic Tea Party member running for Congress who doesn't even sleep if he doesn't have his pocket constitution pressed against his breast would like to disagree, unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:I'm actually having some difficulty parsing your argument out because you seem to be making multiple, possibly contradictory points. First, you claim that we should be judging Jefferson and other complicit founding fathers on the basis of their parochial interests related to the maintenance of the state. The you say that because they succeeded in this affair the morally questionable things they did should not be seriously questioned? Unrelated to this but still stated is your assertion that because jews have greater cultural influence we need more deference/sympathy to past transgressions committed against them? Is this an accurate summary of your argument so far? You're reading what you want into it, have at it. You're free to question the Founders all you like, until your dad gets his comeuppance, for all I care. Jews don't need more deference/sympathy, but they'll get it, in the US at least.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:You're reading what you want into it, have at it. You're free to question the Founders all you like, until your dad gets his comeuppance, for all I care. Jews don't need more deference/sympathy, but they'll get it, in the US at least. So that is not the argument you are making?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:You're reading what you want into it, have at it. You're free to question the Founders all you like, until your dad gets his comeuppance, for all I care. Jews don't need more deference/sympathy, but they'll get it, in the US at least. Pauline Kael posted:This is the problem. I, and lots of other Americans, have family that were effected by the Holocaust. Literal blood relatives that got tossed in the ovens. You think it odd that something that's still in immediate memory for millions of Americans, horror caught on film for all to still see today, has a larger cultural effect than what happened 200+ years ago to a group that's pretty fundamentally out of the picture today? Are you dumb? As far as I can tell, your main point is "I'm biased, things that affect people I'm close to feel more important to me and you should understand that." Sure I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Last Buffalo posted:In an attempt to re-rail the thread, I have a related question. I'm not sure if Roger Williams counts as a founding father but he actually espoused inclusive human rights going so far as to say Native Americans were equal to white settlers.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
How many people was Thomas Jefferson actually responsible for killing? I started out near the start of this thread talking about how awful Jefferson was, but I think it's been derailed by hyperbole.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
We have had around 4 pages of genocide chat and arguments of what does and does not make a genocide and somehow no one has posted the list from the Geneva convention (I think) that states it? Im going off my memory but I am pretty sure the U.S has done everything on that list to the natives. I would post it but I am on my phone.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Soviet Space Dog posted:Why do people wear ties? It's weird if you approach it from a context-less point of view. However we all know that ties represent culturally a certain level of "class" or professionalism because we grew up in an environment that has respectful people wearing ties. Most people wear ties because they are forced to. I don't think it has anything to do with professionalism or class. I think it is more about proving that you are willing to wear some stupid and useless piece of fabric around your neck that serves to other purpose than to signify that you are a whore, and you will do whatever your cooperate masters tell you to do if you want to have financial security in your life. Sorry, I know this seems a little "wtf", but I hate ties and what they represent to me more than anything on the planet. I will loving die before I ever wear a tie again. In my mind, a tie is a slave collar, and to make it worse, I willingly put in on.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
KelJu posted:Most people wear ties because they are forced to. I don't think it has anything to do with professionalism or class. I think it is more about proving that you are willing to wear some stupid and useless piece of fabric around your neck that serves to other purpose than to signify that you are a whore, and you will do whatever your cooperate masters tell you to do if you want to have financial security in your life. I feel the same way about pants.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:I feel the same way about pants. Pants keep my legs warm in the winter.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
KelJu posted:Pants keep my legs warm in the winter. Once you're in a climate controlled office they're kind of superfluous, though.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
KelJu posted:Most people wear ties because they are forced to. I don't think it has anything to do with professionalism or class. I think it is more about proving that you are willing to wear some stupid and useless piece of fabric around your neck that serves to other purpose than to signify that you are a whore, and you will do whatever your cooperate masters tell you to do if you want to have financial security in your life. I'm using professionalism and class in a neutral way that you read it
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 04:06 |
|
|
I figured as much. I'm just a little weird, and I have hot button responses for some things. Don't feel the need to engage me as if I were a sane person. I still have a lot of resentment about cutting off a 10 inch braided goatee and taking out a lot of piercings for my first IT job, only to to realize that I would rather be poor and happy than middle class and suicidal. I loving hated corporate life and I loving hated ties.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 00:36
|
|