Guess what day tomorrow is???

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by robayon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sure those things happened, I'm not defending the French or the Russians, now let's look at Native American genocide, slavery, overthrowing regimes to keep companies solvent, invading countries to acquire their resources...

America isn't so different

Every single country ever is founded via conquest. Does that make it okay and good? Of course not, but if you really want to go through and do this sanctimonious accounting of history and somehow try to rectify past injustices, there are a whole lot of centuries of human history to go through before america even existed.

America became extremely powerful and influential though so I understand why people go out of their way to single out American atrocities as if they are particularly unique, but it still gives you a completely skewed and false sense of history.

People talk about things like "giving the land back" to native americans still living today. I get it, seems logical enough, until you ask them which tribe we give it back to? The tribe that had it first, or the other tribe that massacred that tribe and took it from them? Oops! Moral grandstanding gets dicey quick when you have to consider the totality of history and not just cherrypick through it.

[Gravydoo II]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Every single country ever is founded via conquest. Does that make it okay and good? Of course not, but if you really want to go through and do this sanctimonious accounting of history and somehow try to rectify past injustices, there are a whole lot of centuries of human history to go through before america even existed.

America became extremely powerful and influential though so I understand why people go out of their way to single out American atrocities as if they are particularly unique, but it still gives you a completely skewed and false sense of history.

People talk about things like "giving the land back" to native americans still living today. I get it, seems logical enough, until you ask them which tribe we give it back to? The tribe that had it first, or the other tribe that massacred that tribe and took it from them? Oops! Moral grandstanding gets dicey quick when you have to consider the totality of history and not just cherrypick through it.

Thats pretty easy. You dont have to go back 15,000 years in history to find out who owned the land, last. You check the deed, who was it taken from when the deed was signed? Give it back to them. Its that simple.

Pretty sure if you got wiped out by the tribe occupying the land you couldnt have been there to be cheated out of it by whites.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

People talk about things like "giving the land back" to native americans still living today. I get it, seems logical enough, until you ask them which tribe we give it back to? The tribe that had it first, or the other tribe that massacred that tribe and took it from them? Oops! Moral grandstanding gets dicey quick when you have to consider the totality of history and not just cherrypick through it.

Trying to be woke backfires when people realized all you did was remove the Native American lady but keep the land [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Trying to be woke backfires when people realized all you did was remove the Native American lady but keep the land [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hate this. Last I knew land o lakes was the teamster union endorsed brand.

Fucking wobblies, ya know? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[robayon]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Every single country ever is founded via conquest. Does that make it okay and good? Of course not, but if you really want to go through and do this sanctimonious accounting of history and somehow try to rectify past injustices, there are a whole lot of centuries of human history to go through before america even existed.

America became extremely powerful and influential though so I understand why people go out of their way to single out American atrocities as if they are particularly unique, but it still gives you a completely skewed and false sense of history.

People talk about things like "giving the land back" to native americans still living today. I get it, seems logical enough, until you ask them which tribe we give it back to? The tribe that had it first, or the other tribe that massacred that tribe and took it from them? Oops! Moral grandstanding gets dicey quick when you have to consider the totality of history and not just cherrypick through it.

Great philosophy if your goal is keeping the status quo in place, and deliberately paralyze yourself

History is oceans of blood, guess we can't do better so I guess no action is the correct action

Welp glad we brushed that dirt off our collective shoulders

What's that, the neoliberal American politician decrying Chinese Uyghur genocide or the treatment of Tibetans? Well, considering the long history between those peoples I guess we had better just do nothing at all

Sure glad we wrestled that octopus

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by robayon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Great philosophy if your goal is keeping the status quo in place, and deliberately paralyze yourself

History is oceans of blood, guess we can't do better so I guess no action is the correct action

Welp glad we brushed that dirt off our collective shoulders

What's that, the neoliberal American politician decrying Chinese Uyghur genocide or the treatment of Tibetans? Well, considering the long history between those peoples I guess we had better just do nothing at all

Sure glad we wrestled that octopus

Justice for the dead at the expense of justice for the living is no kind of justice, which is what you're talking about. I hardly said "no action is the correct action". Like what?? Tons of actions are correct actions.

[robayon]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Justice for the dead at the expense of justice for the living is no kind of justice, which is what you're talking about. I hardly said "no action is the correct action". Like what?? Tons of actions are correct actions.

If taking no action is not what you are suggesting, then what were you suggesting?

You were pushing back against 'giving the land back' and then took issue with what tribe possessed which land, and when, and that moral grandstanding 'gets dicey'

So... what is it that you suggest, if not nothing?