Collectible figures and censorship??

[Blackthornone]

They didn't own North America.

In most cases, they didn't even have a concept of private property. There wasn't even a unified 'they'.

Nomads are always going to have issues with fixed settlements, and they're never going to have a valid claim if all they can come up with is "we were here last year" (and my father was here before that, and his father, and his father, etc.).

Once they decide to start massacring settlers in the night, all bets are off.

Why didn't they own it? Maybe because the English did not recognize their lifestyle as valid. The native peoples lived on the land, and off the land, for their sustenance. They were nomadic because they followed the herds of buffalo which was their food. They did this because they were smart enough to realize that free roaming animals were healthier and better eating as in more nutritious than pen raised animals, and they also realized the importance of regular physical exercise, which is something those fat Europeans did not understand, eating fatty meat that gave them disease, and being sedentary, getting fat and calling that successful living. The native American lifestyle meant healthy eating and fit healthy bodies.

They did have a unified they, they were called tribes. The U.S. government displaced many many tribes so they could take over with their one, greedy, gluttonous they.

A valid claim of property according to who? Who's definition? Answer: according to the opinion of someone else who wants to displace those people living on that land to take it as their own. That basically is to say that might makes right. By that excuse, it is ok for a man to rape a woman, because he can, and then he has the right to complain when she scratches him in self defense, and he says, hey, she scratched me! That's my blood! All I wanted was to use her cookie. It isn't like she was using it. It was vacant.

As far as massacring settlers in the night, what if there were "settlers" who broke into your home and intended to remodel it without your permission, and make it theirs? Would you just stand by and let it happen, or would you try to drive them off, and if they didn't leave or resisted with force, kill them to defend what was yours and to protect your family?

 

[devilof76]

Yea, um, I'm not arguing with either of you. I have nails to hammer into my face today, and you can't take that away from me.

 

[thenammagazine]

Yea, um, I'm not arguing with either of you. I have nails to hammer into my face today, and you can't take that away from me.

Maybe releasing the swelling will help!

Sounds like fun, bud. Pics later!

 

[SnakeDoctor]

I dunno, intentions or not, if people are digging up Native American artifacts, skeletons, etc., in their back yards, your argument suddenly fails, doesn't it?

No. Skeletons and artifacts change nothing. People died in war. People died of disease. Civilizations rise and fall. Still not a genocide, or a holocaust, or anything of the sort.

The fact is, our government pilfered their lands from them, violence or no, and gave them ____ land to live on afterwards, completely obliterating a society for personal gain. Then, when they found out those lands had oil on them, they stole those lands and gave them even ____tier lands to call home. Let's not forget that they also hunted sacred animals to near extinction and then told the Native Americans that they're only able to hunt a limited amount for their rituals, etc., because of said threat of extinction.

The fact is, they lost a war. It sucks, but such is the nature of human history. They occupied more land than their limited numbers could defend ... particularly when there was also war among tribes. America was violent, sparsely-occupied, and full of opportunity. Nobody owned the land. A war was inevitable.

Immigrants settled the east coast and moved westward. Both sides attacked one another when settlers intruded on lands that were necessary to sustain a nomadic lifestyle that was apparently unsustainable outside of a bubble. People died. The nomadic lifestyle died. It was bound to happen as the world became more interconnected, as immigrants moved, as free people sought opportunity. I don't think American settlers had any particular duty to preserve a dying nomadic culture. The trend of history has been toward civilization, and away from nomadic hunter-gatherer cultures. It took a while to reach these shores, but it eventually did. Progress.

Honestly, it's been long over and done with and in today's America, people are who they make of themselves. But don't make light of the situation and blow it off like it was nothing. It was rape, plain and simple.

I made light of nothing. It was not "rape". It was war between two cultures that could not occupy the same space. War is hell.

The end of the native nomadic culture may be one of the tragic stories in history. But, civilizations rise and fall. Old lifestyles are superseded by new ones when a better thing comes along. You can mourn them, or not. You can try to preserve time capsules of an era long gone, or not. But, the fall of a civilization is not necessarily a genocide. I don't mourn nomadic culture ... just as I don't mourn the Roman Empire, or the Aztecs, or Old West, or pre-industrial agrarian America. Times change. People move. Cultures clash. Progress is made. The world gets smaller.

No matter whether you consider it just or unjust, tragic or inevitable (or both) ... it is still not comparable to the Third Riech, no matter what conventional, self-hating wisdom tells you.

SnakeDoc

 

[surfin4]

............says the man from mexico!

 

[ali032373]

It's a white washing to dismiss what happened to native ams. as sort just what happens to ppl in changing times. You can use that rationale to dismiss just about evry human tragedy ever perpetrated.

 

[thenammagazine]

No. Skeletons and artifacts change nothing. People died in war. People died of disease. Civilizations rise and fall. Still not a genocide, or a holocaust, or anything of the sort.

The fact is, they lost a war. It sucks, but such is the nature of human history. They occupied more land than their limited numbers could defend ... particularly when there was also war among tribes. America was violent, sparsely-occupied, and full of opportunity. Nobody owned the land. A war was inevitable.

Immigrants settled the east coast and moved westward. Both sides attacked one another when settlers intruded on lands that were necessary to sustain a nomadic lifestyle that was apparently unsustainable outside of a bubble. People died. The nomadic lifestyle died. It was bound to happen as the world became more interconnected, as immigrants moved, as free people sought opportunity. I don't think American settlers had any particular duty to preserve a dying nomadic culture. The trend of history has been toward civilization, and away from nomadic hunter-gatherer cultures. It took a while to reach these shores, but it eventually did. Progress.

I made light of nothing. It was not "rape". It was war between two cultures that could not occupy the same space. War is hell.

The end of the native nomadic culture may be one of the tragic stories in history. But, civilizations rise and fall. Old lifestyles are superseded by new ones when a better thing comes along. You can mourn them, or not. You can try to preserve time capsules of an era long gone, or not. But, the fall of a civilization is not necessarily a genocide. I don't mourn nomadic culture ... just as I don't mourn the Roman Empire, or the Aztecs, or Old West, or pre-industrial agrarian America. Times change. People move. Cultures clash. Progress is made. The world gets smaller.

No matter whether you consider it just or unjust, tragic or inevitable (or both) ... it is still not comparable to the Third Riech, no matter what conventional, self-hating wisdom tells you.

SnakeDoc

I can apply your same argument to the pro-aspect of the Third Reich. The problem with your argument is the only things that separate the Reich from the early US are two minor details; the wholesale slaughter of Jews vs. societal rape and that the Reich lost. And given your POV, it's easy to assuming that you're a supporter of ethnic cleansing so long as those doing said cleansing are winning?

And last time I checked, Manifest Destiny wasn't a declaration of war (making the actions essentially illegal) and anybody today doing what the US did back then would be guilty of Crimes Against Humanity.

 

[FLOSI]

Pretty sure this thread lost it's initial intent at some point. Lockin' her up.