In honor of Indigenous Peoples' Day
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (28)
sorted by:
[Climbs on soapbox; clears throat]
Ahem.
I think that indigenous people's day is racist - verging on the NAzi ideology of purity.
What happens if one can claim multiple ethnicities? I know there is a meme of mutt - of race-mixing - which is portrayed as somehow dirty. But TBH it is a load of cobblers.
A simple, public figure example is Winston Peters in New Zealand, who has a Maori parent and an Anglo/white one. He is dead-set against any plan to feather one race's nest, because it is just plain silly to deny the other parent's ancestry. Also he cannot be accused of being a white supremacist, even as some people try.
So for some other examples, I know someone who is Dutch and Scottish/Norman but also has a Khoisan/Bushman ancestor. I know another who is Korean and Raratongan, was brought up by Anglos and jokes about being Asian in a Kiwi accent. Scandalous! What about the person who can trace their ancestry to Genghis Khan, but in the process of time has become a proud Frisian? In New Zealand, we often encounter Scottish or Irish even Dutch Maoris. They have Anglophone names, unless they are radicalized and convert it to a Maori one. Do we reject these products of race-mixing?
I know that the virtue signalers use a weenie drop of ancestry to claim legitimacy (think of Pocahontas Warren), but all of us have ancestors. Even if we cannot trace each line, those ancestors come from all over the globe. So the whole exercise of recognizing indigenous peoples becomes meaningless. People moved around, since the beginning of time. They had offspring. Each and every one of us has a story there. I think the results from supposed "DNA ancestry tests" can show that conclusively, however.
The funniest of this sort of example is the Brits, who have had waves of people coming to their Islands. Romans (who were from all over the Empire, so could have been Eastern European or even Namibian), Vikings, Angles, Saxons, and Normans (Frankified Vikings) to name but a few. There are Irish people with Spanish ancestors, from when men washed ashore after the Armada debacle. I know of Dutch people who have Georgian ancestors - when there was a famine in the Caucasus, people walked across Europe and landed in the fertile land of milk and honey.
Do we now have to recite all our ancestors, and pass a purity test by eliminating those people who are not pure, before we do anything? Oh let's do recognize ALL the minorities. LOL - that's everyone. Also, can we go back to a home country and claim all that land back, now? I think not. Otherwise one's ancestry is actually quite boring dinner conversation.
Columbus day it is then,
The point of Columbus day is to remember one person, and his crew/ships. It is about (re-)discovering the American continent by Europeans. In other words, it is an important event in the country's history.
The day is not about celebrating anyone's special ancestors.
Lief Ericsson day it is then.
I know right? What about Tartarians and Clovis people?
It’s also important to celebrate the first Americans and their culture that are a proud part of US history as well.
Indeed, and how far back shall we go. But there was Thanksgiving, before.
Recognizing the culture of indigenous people is important history to teach our children and the tyranny that happened to these people on their land is vital for Americans to understand.
Indigenous people aren’t mixed muts. They have languages, were mathematicians, farmers, astronomers, scientists, healers. There’s a lot to learn there, remember and celebrate. Much of this has been forcibly forgotten and that’s sad and very devastating to them.
Columbus introduced the Americas to our European culture, but he did not “discover” the Americas. There were people here living and thriving before Europeans came over with illness, rape and their globalist pursuits of gold and land.
I’m a conservative that thinks that Columbus was an opportunist and some might say rapist. I don’t think there’s much to celebrate about that guy.
Wow. I did not say he discovered. I said he re-discovered. I am aware of people already being there. And I am aware of the whole Columbus Day power struggle.
I firmly believe we should teach our children about ALL our ancestors, and I am against NOT teaching History (or it being replaced with agenda-driven news-article searches, as I have witnessed in schools). At least one should foster a passion for how it all went down, for one's offspring. Some of that can be done via statues and public art, so that one can talk about that person, or event, to one's offspring. The 'ole word-of-mouth. So I also disagree with pulling down statues, and replacing them with soulless blocks of stupid.
Certainly Columbus was an opportunist. In those days one had to be, to get the attention of Royalty and to then go ahead and complete the adventure. Just as influencers today raise money to do stuff and travel. All of them are opportunists. He had things wrong too. Called the people he encountered Indians, because he thought he had found India.
I also abhor tyranny, but guess what? Children are born to parents from both sides of the supposed conflict. This is love, not tyranny. People will procreate, and if one is to claim that some children are better than others, then I am not in agreement.
In defense of mixed mutts: that was my whole point: many people have ancestors from multiple races. Are they not indigenous, if they are born in the land? Is there a certain percentage one needs to claim, before getting recognized as having indigenous status? Or are those kids to be discarded as 'not real'? And what would happen to people whose ancestors came from a land 300 years ago and pioneered in some far away country. Do they have to go back to where their forefathers lived? What arrogance. My other point, was that some people cannot choose sides, because they have feet in both artificial 'camps', even as they are passionate about the land they live in.
No, we learn about our European, African and Indigenous ancestors in American history books now. Although unfortunately, Wit & Wisdom is skewing that a lot atm. According to your boring, droning word dumps, “the whole exercise of recognizing indigenous peoples is meaningless.” Your whole soapbox rant is meaningless and I heavily disagree. It’s obvious that you love hearing yourself speak. ALL people deserve a say, a culture, a history and a chance to preserve it — if they can. Don’t come on here saying racist trash and not expect a complete smack down.
So, despite your semi-troll post, accusing me of things, I shall answer.
It is my belief that talking about this touchy subject is better than not, and I am here for the debate.
My point is that one can accuse anyone of racism as soon as there is talk about race, because we all got one, babe - so that makes the word racism apply to every individual on earth, and that is the definition of meaningless - BTW.
The word 'indigenous' is the most racist of all. Indigenous to what? Prove to me that such-and-such 'tribe' did not migrate at some point. There is, apparently, cause for ethnic cleansing and war strafing, if people have only been 'there' 400 years or so (think: Ukraine, Northern Ireland, Falklands etc.). Are people considered to have been 'always there' when their ancestors were provably there 2000 years ago? Apparently not., given the ethnic cleansing of Semites in Palestine, currently, but also Welsh, Scots, Gaelic people, and anyone disagreeing with the Crown. Those 'others' are nothing more than animals, and should be sold off as slaves (I think NAZiz said 'rats').
Notice that people in Britain, Holland or Scandinavia are never considered indigenous. So, the word, kind of means 'brown'. Definitely not white or even any kind of yellowish shade - (hum. Is that not racist - I am confusion). Mind you, the Khoi San in Africa have some of the oldest DNA in the world, and they had pale mocha-yellow skin, and slanty eyes, compared to their neighbors, but are DNA-wise were closely linked to seafaring tribes in Northern Japan 10 000 years ago - and they were largely wiped out, because not black, or tall enough, or just tiny, BTW.
But guess what? Here's the really triggering bit: Those people with San DNA surviving now, were the ones hiding in the ex-Dutch farms in the hinterland. An inconvenient truth - that Indigenous San DNA shows up in SA wypepo. Same story applies for Moriori people in New Zealand. Their descendants are whitish looking, even though they have indigenous ancestors. Also, the Moriori find it very hard negotiating, when faced with the dominant Tainui tribe, because their whole social system was about retreating, and hiding from the cannibals.
So that is my whole point - the whole racism and indigenous awareness thing is tribalism in drag.
Wake UP.
Also, being indigenous, is kind of like being 'pure' or achieving 'unobtainium' - so many people are sidelined just because of a mixed race marriage in their past - half something, or quarter something (or how fine do we need to slice this? 1/32nd or maybe 1/64th, A drop? Ok then, I claim Han Chinese, and some Georgian-Russian too, and Frisian, and a dose of knight-in-armour German Royalty). Can't u see that the whole indigenous ideology is @-ed?
LOL that you think I like hearing myself, and accuse me of being racist to boot.
We are adults, reading and writing, here.
You no likee? Click on somethin' else. Be rude again and I will block.