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:
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.