Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    If they want to consider any indigenous population of the Americas they have to go back to whom took from who all the way back to the first indigenous population...because that's how the indian's became an indigenous population and those before them and before them and so on.
    Everyone, across the world was in the process of civilization and those that were not civilized, those who had no structure to the area they occupied were pushed aside or assimilated into what we call the western civilized world.

    That's history...how else could mankind evolve socially, technically, industrially, etc.
    I get the impression from these leftest, it would be just fine if we all lived in Teepees and lived horrible lives at the mercy of nature.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by bobsprinkle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      All this indigenous/who was here first is EXACTLY the same argument between the arabs/Israelis. Arabs say it is our land....we were first. Probably depends on how far back you wanna go. I say Israel actually did SOMETHING with the land. They built one hell of a country. Exactly the same with America/Americans.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    I always counter this with the statement that the term "Indigenous" is a Euro-centric term meaning who ever happened to be in a place when the Europeans arrived.

    Alternatively it's biblical based concept that people were created in the places they live. The best current science tells us that we are all immigrants from Africa in a variety of waves.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      So then Indigenous wouldn't be correct when applied to any ethnic group?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        Africans -- at least as current science indicates.

        Humans have a common source, we are one species. We have evolved over time and, at least until modern transportation has stirred the pot, had variation based on regions, but we remain cross-fertile.

        Other than Africa, no one is "native". As I said, the concept is Euro-centric because it' tends to be used for who happened to be in a place when the Europeans arrived. We have maps of American Indian tribes, but those are only what the current situation was at the time of European arrival. The situation in North America was as fluid as the rest of the world with people coming and going and being displaced by others, sometimes peacefully sometimes via violence.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jlc 2 months, 3 weeks ago
          Well...if we also consider that 'the very first people who set their feet on a place' to be indigenous, then much of Polynesia qualifies. But the current American Indian tribes do not, because we have at least two layers of predecessors identified.

          Jan
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 2 months, 3 weeks ago
            That would be a new meaning. Webster says "Originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native."

            It implies an ownership deeper than "I saw got here first!"
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ jlc 2 months, 3 weeks ago
              Not really. We consider the nene to be indigenous to Hawaii - but of course it came from 'somewhere else' because 400,000 years ago, Hawaii was just a bunch of molten rock. "Native" "Indigenous" and "Endemic" are all terms that refer to something that is local.

              You do point out that these terms are used unevenly. We consider the Maori to be indigenous to New Zealand but not the Mongols to Eastern Europe - and yet they both have lived in those places for about the same amount of time:750 years.

              Jan
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 2 months, 3 weeks ago
                Well, I don't consider anyone to be indigenous other than in Africa. It's a flawed concept. Do we know if anyone was there before the Maori?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ jlc 2 months, 3 weeks ago
                  We are pretty sure that in New Zealand and Hawaii and the SE islands, the Polynesians were the first. Over in the Western areas of the Pacific, you get more layers as far back as Homo floriensis - who was pre H. sapiens. Homo floriensis is now thought to be a branch of H. erectus, but I am still excited by the thought that H. floriensis might be a separate branch that goes back to Australopithecus (because of the foot structure).

                  Jan
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    Outrage! We need Outrage!

    How will we get votes if there is no outrage to keep people from thinking, and get out their pitchforks and torches. We need Outrage for the media to control the people.

    Worked for the Bolsheviks.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by KevinSchwinkendorf 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    This reminds me of the recent controversy over the land where Mt. Rushmore is located. Speaking of "the Left" owning "big tech" social media, leftist preferences in google searches, etc., try googling Mt. Rushmore - almost all hits you get talk about how "the White Man" STOLE the land from the "indigenous peoples" (the Lakota, in this case). Well, the actual history is a little more complicated than that. See the linked article, written by a Western history author, Tom Correa: (spoiler alert: before the Lakota lived in that area of South Dakota, the Cheyenne lived there, and before them, the Kiowas, before them, the Pawnee, before them, the Crow, and before them, the Arikara, who go all the way back to ca. 1100 AD. Since they had no written language, I assume this was determined by archeologocial evidence.)
    http://www.americancowboychronicles.c...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ DriveTrain 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    There simply are no "indigenous" Americans.

    Everybody in this hemisphere is a tourist, basically.

    I once had a Facebrag "Friend" who was (or so I thought,) a fellow advocate of at least liberty - he joined us in protesting a Gore appearance in the NW back in the '90s, and later ran (unsuccessfully,) for mayor of that particular town, on an explicitly Libertarian (not Objectivist) platform, but I gave him my support anyway, even going so far as to sneak onto the grassy knoll between two busy freeway ramps in downtown to jam his yard sign into the ground, for mega-visibility. And then do it the next night, after the local frothing collectivists removed it. 'Went through about six before election day came and went.

    Anyhow, this guy also happened to be part of some WA state tribe, which I thought was interesting but not critical - which it was, and wasn't.

    So up comes that thing a couple years ago where a bunch of people were bused into North/South Dakota to protest that innocuous pipeline that was unobtrusively traversing their sacred or scared or scarred something-or-other, and this guy (who shall remain unnamed,) casually jettisons his Libertarian... stuff and flops into the tribal side of the tribe vs. reason conflict.

    In the midst of some Facebook back-and-forth on the subject, the "I" word came up and I said what I just did above - that nobody here was always here; that everybody here came from somewhere else, meaning the "indigenous" and "aboriginal" pretensions are simply false. (Not, as others have pointed out here, that it would make a difference in any case, absent the concept of property rights.)

    To which I got a whole lot of frothing vitriol, then an "Un-Friending." So the human race has a long way to go before its constituents - some of them - will have successfully extricated themselves from toxic group-think.

    Even self-styled advocates of liberty.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      +10, Drive Train. A new definition is needed so that "indigenous" can refer to first occupiers. I would also say that the recent focusing on "indigenous" people is to get them included in the oppressed minorities so as to share in any booty to come.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 2 months, 2 weeks ago
    The Speech Police (left-wing Dems,et al) want to rewrite history. They are History illiterate. They want to perpetuate their own myths through communist-style propaganda. They conjecture that 100% of the American people are uneducated.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ycandrea 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    These people came from mostly from the middle east. They got to the Americas first is all. Does that entitle them to the land? I don't think so.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      "Finders, keepers." Or do we want to rationalize that might makes right and taking by force or fraud is OK? Conquest and plunder were the modus operandi throughout history, notwithstanding a quaint old notion of "Thou shalt not steal," and "Thou shalt not kill." It's too seductive to go with "to the victors belong the spoils".
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bassboat 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    The "Speech Police" are nothing but a bunch of nerds who couldn't hold a job out of academia. They have to do things, like meanings of words, to be recognized by their peers to have a meaningful life. Meanwhile, the press who are down the IQ pole fawningly adopt anything that they come up with. Someone needs to put a stop to these nerdlings from destroying our language. This is an area where people with a platform could be of use. Politicians, ministers, teachers plus several more come to mind if they only had the guts.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    If these idiots are successful in their endeavors, what will keep us from repeating past mistakes? They want to wipe out any evidence of wrongdoing. Nice try!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mccannon01 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      To topple Western Civilization they have to maintain records of wrongdoing (by today's standards) of European (white) people over all time and expunge all the rest, especially anything good accomplished by Western Civilization. Once the goal of toppling is achieved, there will be nothing to prevent repeating the whole thing over again. If "they" succeed, the attrition rate will be enormous - world wide.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo