Do you not agree that the land your house is sitting on has been stolen from the Algonquin? If so, why should you keep it?
Why are you different from the 23 year old kid in South Africa that I talked about upthread?
Don’t worry, people. This problem has been solved. Donald Trump is now on the case:
Not true. They would have had their choice of lots of legitimately-obtained land.
Are you under the impression that Black people were somehow incapable of entering into *legitimate *property deals with White people?
Doesn’t render the expectations moral.
I see your slippery slope, and I refuse to set a foot on it. “Back to the start of Apartheid legislation” is a perfectly fine bright line to draw in South Africa.
Well, I can’t say anyone is surprised - he already has bought into American white supremacist narratives, buying into South African white supremacist narratives is par for the course.
For him, and his party, historically - we haven’t forgottenwhich US party opposed sanctions against Apartheid as long as they could get away with it.
The real point is that huge Canada has enough crown land sitting virgin and unused to make full reparations whenever we decide to.
You may have noticed SA is a tiny nation by comparison. Look closer and you’ll see that the white farmers took ALL of the rich agricultural land. Virtually ALL ! So no, it’s not enough to offer some unproductive, hardscrabble, useless for farming, land in its place.
And attempting to compare Canada and SA is beyond ridiculous. You’re just making yourself look silly when you attempt to do so, in my opinion.
And yes, returning this land could throw their agricultural prospects way, way back for as much as a generation. And that’s a shame, it will mean hardship for the country, as I’m sure they are aware. But considering what the rightful owners, of that rich agricultural land, have suffered since being removed, I believe it’s possible, as a nation, they’d be willing to take that hit to correct this long standing and cruel injustice.
This should be SA decision to make. Whatever hardships they are willing to under go to make reparations is for them alone to decide and then live with, in my opinion.
Hey, we’re clean UltraVires. North-central West Virginia was the homeland of the Monongahela Culture. (Actually by as far south as Bridgeport, there were no permanent settlements. Morgantown had one where Suncrest Town Center is now, but by Fairmont they trickled out.) We don’t know what the heck happened to them, but they aren’t around anymore. Probably drought led to gradual abandonment of our area and infectious disease and invasion by the Iroquois and Mingo finished them off. Regardless, NCWV was empty land when the Europeans showed up (maybe more accurately, it was claimed by lots of competing factions like the Shawnee, Iroquois and Mingo, but none had a real historical claim to it and they were just as opportunistic as the Europeans.) It’s possible that they got absorbed into the Susquehannocks or the Eries, but we’ll likely never be sure.
It’s nice to live in a place where it takes you two days to hack your way three miles up a steep mountainside. 
Two weeks ago, I took a church youth group to a cave up in Tucker County and the trail was overgrown. It took us an hour and a half chopping with machetes to make it a quarter mile up a hillside and that was with us using a creekbed part of the time. I was thinking to myself, “Before roads, how the heck did people make it through the mountains and survive out here?”
Well, no I can’t agree because I haven’t fully researched it. My area is near the border of two different tribes and I have no idea exactly what treaties were followed or flaunted 200 years ago. Thats a major difference with your 23 year old - his own parents probably elected the government that seized the land.
Correct. However, those groups did use north central West Virginia as their hunting lands. Early settlers in Harrison, Marion and Monongalia counties originally thought that there were no natives here until one day their whole family was dead.
Then clashes became common and atrocities were committed on both sides. The natives did not appreciate that for hundreds of years, they were able to harvest game in what is now north central West Virginia, but all of a sudden these settlements were popping up who were hunting their game and harvesting their berries and wild fruits.
You can only say that we are “clean” if we use the English common law concept of adverse possession as the natives had no claim because their settlements were not permanent.
To your second point, you are absolutely correct. Those early pioneers were hardy men far beyond what we could ever hope for. One of my father’s friends summarized it best when I was growing up and we were clearing downed logs. After using spud bars and other lever devices to roll a log down the hill and out of our way, we all looked at each other sweating and dirty and he said, “Now you see why mankind started inventing shit.” No truer words have ever been spoken.
I’ll disagree with that. I think that more of what we were seeing is that NCWV and even the Ohio Valley were both settled by primarily agrarian tribes like the Fort Ancient and Monongahela Civilizations. European settlement pushed larger more aggressive tribes into land that they had previously found undesirable. A combination of disease, drought and warfare from these new tribes-- like the Delaware and Shawnee and Iroquoisan-speaking tribes-- led to their cultural extinction. It’s possible that the Fort Ancient’s became the Shawnee (although the Shawnee themselves claimed descent from the Delaware and the first European encounters with them were very far East of the Fort Ancient homeland,) but it’s unlikely that the Mon culture did. They appear to have fled east in small refugee bands and possibly joined the Minqua, but that is conjecture at best.
Bridgeport itself was likely home to the Hopewell culture who built Oak Mound, but they had left the area by 1000 AD and their descendants (possibly the Mon and Fort Ancient cultures) had gone north and west. The Mon culture probably went extinct in the late 17th century and semi-nomadic groups like the Shawnee, Delaware and Mingo(and other Iroquoisan groups) started using their homeland, but had likely only been in the area for 50-100 years prior to the Decker’s Creek Massacre and none had actual ‘claim’ to the area as evidenced by the fact that the conflicts in NCWV were from various tribes. The Decker’s Creek Massacre as an example was attributed to Delawares, but the Delaware homeland was near Philadelphia and only in the middle 1700s did they get pushed farther west. Similarly Mingo claims to the territory only really began at the same time as the earliest European colonization.
It’s possible that the Shawnee had some historical claim, but we know that around the time of the dissolution of the Mon Culture, the Beaver Wars were in full swing and it’s much more likely that the Iroquois eliminated the remnants of the Mon Culture during their expansion following the Mohawk War of 1666. What was happening between the end of the Mon Culture and the beginning of European settlement was a constant back and forth between the Iroquois and Shawnee as well as newer migrants like the Delaware - frequently egged on by France and Britain. West Virginia may have played a minor role, but certainly no one could claim it as controlled territory.
It was more of a no man’s land as various tribes expanded and migrated west fleeing European and Iroquoisan dominance. Did various tribes hunt here? Sure, that’s a reasonable theory, but that no more made it their ‘land’ than Mon National Forest is my land. They might have hunted here, but so did Europeans. The original ‘owners’ if we want to make a chain of ownership were killed and it became a hunting ground only due to their absence and not some sort of historical claim. I guess the Iroquois could probably have the strongest claim due to right of conquest, but their claim was no stronger than European claims due to right of conquest.
Apartheid was wrong, as was slavery in America. But neither was the wholesale genocide of an entire group of people. The Holocaust is in a class only with a select few occurrences. Don’t degrade the memory of 6 million Jews.
Such a comparison certainly doesn’t degrade the memory of my relatives who died in the Holocaust. You shouldn’t degrade the memory of the millions of black people who were brutalized, raped, tortured, and murdered by implying that American slavery and apartheid were not among the worst atrocities in human history, along with the Holocaust.
What, exactly, is degrading to the memory of Jews about using the Holocaust in a comparison - one which, I’ll note, was not a direct one, merely an analogy. At no point did I say “Apartheid was as bad as the Holocaust”
And not a peep for the Roma, Slavs, gays and others. I guess their memory doesn’t count?
But congrats on diving right into the thick of so many contentious race-related threads on your very first day here. That’s mighty … nice … of you, really.
The holocaust, the Bolshevik revolution, the forced famine in the Ukraine, Mao’s murdering of tens of millions of Chinese, the killing fields of Cambodia, the general death toll and millions of dead from Communism in general, the Armenian genocide, the Rwandan genocide, the continued slavery of millions of people, the gassing of the Kurds and their general oppression, the horrors of North Korean life, etc.
If the forced expropriation of land and property is the evil we are talking about, pretty much every Communist revolution can be added to the list. And the 2 million refugees flooding out of Venezuela might have something to say about the destructive toll of ‘Democratic Socialism’.
There is no shortage of horrors we can point to. Apartheid was evil and horrible, hut no more so than the horrors that were visited on numerous peoples in the 20th century. And given that the African National Congress is both racist and Marxist, I expect nothing less than a humanitarian disaster there for both blacks and whites unless there is serious political reform. Trading a white nationalist government for a black nationalist Marxist government is not necessarily an upgrade. And if you are looking for ultimate justice for all, prepare to be disappointed.
There’s a lot of relevant political criticism one can aim at the ANC (like any other ruling government), but to call them an equal (or worse) alternative to Apartheid South Africa shows quite a blinkered grasp of history.
The ANC formered South Africa as a free, legitimate, multiparty, democracy. This is not to even bring in the criminal actions of Apartheid South Africa.
…any day now. I mean, it’s only been 24 years. Soooon!
“Slavs” being added in there in descriptions of what constitutes “The Holocaust” was at the insistence of Poland trying to cast itself as a victim of Nazism akin to the Jews. Its ridiculous because 90% of non-Jewish Poles survived the war, 90% of Polish Jews were murdered. Also, hundreds of thousands of Slavs served as Waffen SS and Wehrmacht volunteers; Slavs are absolutely no victim group of Nazism. Many Poles also served in the Wehrmacht.
Jews outnumbered Roma 10 to 1 as victims of non-combat rooted persecution. Gays were found incidentally, not hunted down to the last one as the Jews were.
I know a lot more than care to admit think the Jews “monopolize suffering.” If one cannot see how Jewish suffering is unique in history, he’s blind, hateful, or both.
You can think that if you like. The numbers say different. Not just Poles - Russians, Ukrainians, others.
That’s because Jews outnumbered Roma by an order of magnitude, too.
Sure. Incidentally. Whatever you say :rolleyes:
Gosh, maybe it’s the dropping into purely tangential threads to make them all about the Jews. Maybe, you think?
There’s absolutely fuck-all unique about Jewish suffering. Being the highest body count doesn’t make Jewish suffering unique. That’s neither blind nor hateful. That’s just awareness that suffering isn’t some zero-sum game.
There is no moral equivalence between a state killing POWs and innocent civilians. And the Slavic volunteers/collaborators the Germans got cancels out any racial motivations.
Yes homosexuality was publicly condemned but they did not seek every single one out they could find on the entire continent and go to the kind of lengths they did against the Jews.
So you’re an anti-Semite? Shame that you’re ungrateful to the one demographic who could benefit bigly from voting conservative but still want to help minorities as many still see their situation in decades past mirrored by other groups. Or how the Jews were a massive portion among the whites who took part in the logistics of the civil rights movement. Show some gratitude and honor. Yes, the Jews are the chosen people, a concept that’s in the Holy Bible and has a lot more weight/gravitas than muh “everything’s a construct.”
Gerald Ford, is that you?
All you guys wringing your hands over the fate of the white landowners: do you understand that the government will, in fact, compensate the landowners? That they’re not getting their land stolen, they’re getting their land seized and are getting compensated for the seized land?
As for what would happen if the Negroes take the productive agricultural land they get back and burning everything down to the ground and salting the earth afterwards, well, I guess that could happen. Donald Trump could demolish Trump Tower tomorrow. But property rights are sacred, right? How can you second-guess the actions of the sacred owner of sacred property?
Or is there a way you can tell when someone is entitled to exercise their sacred property rights? By looking at them, maybe?