While they are technically correct, the information is irrelevant. I'm not going back to Italy anytime soon. It would be a horrible idea to only let Natives live in the USA.
People say America is built on stolen land
Posts
Total:
87
-->
@TheUnderdog
It would be a horrible idea to only let Natives live in the USA.
Yeah, if I was living in USA, I probably wouldnt wanna go back to Italy.
-->
@Best.Korea
Where do you live? Nvm, it's Japan. Are you Japanese or a foreigner?
-->
@TheUnderdog
America is built on stolen land
Next, they'll say the government is funded with stolen money.
-->
@Savant
Technically true, but taxation is needed theft because the alternative is public schools get no funding, which means the computer wouldn't have been built.
Cutting government spending and tax revenue means low income children suffer and die so the globalists can get richer. Understand that if you advocate cutting government spending.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Nvm, it's Japan.
If we are going to trust my profile description, then I also have post doctoral.
Lol
-->
@TheUnderdog
taxation is needed theft
That's my position, but admitting it's theft at all is a hard pill for a lot of pro-tax people to swallow.
-->
@Best.Korea
So where do you live?
-->
@TheUnderdog
Doesn't change the fact the land is stolen.
-->
@Savant
For me, I don't care about the connontations of labels but only their accuracy.
Like if you define, "anti-vax" as someone that is against COVID vax mandates, then I'm anti-vax even though I got 2 boosters. Most people in that situation would be scared of being labeled an anti vaxxer. I'm fine with that title if that's how you define it.
-->
@Intelligence_06
You are correct, but the land being stolen doesn't mean I'm going to move off of the land or learn Cherokee.
A lot of people claim the land being stolen means they should move off. In this context, it doesn't. I'm living in one of the freest place on earth.
-->
@Intelligence_06
What makes land belong to a given group?
-->
@Intelligence_06
What country isn't built on stolen land?
-->
@cristo71
Like the theft of any other thing ever. If a piece of land is owned by someone legally and you raid it, you stole the land essentially.
I guess you could say that native americans back then had no recognized law regarding land ownership, but that is still because the US did not recognize their land ownerships.
-->
@TheUnderdog
@Best.Korea
Where do you live? Nvm, it's Japan. Are you Japanese or a foreigner?
He's a liar, and you're someone who spreads lies without question.
It's funny to see you interact.
-->
@Intelligence_06
I guess you could say that native americans back then had no recognized law regarding land ownership, but that is still because the US did not recognize their land ownerships.
Doesn’t this sound a bit circular to you? “Land belongs to a group when other groups recognize that the land belongs to that group.”
It seems that you simultaneously maintain the opposite: “Land belongs to a certain group even when another group neglects to recognize its ownership.” This is merely a meaningless assertion.
-->
@cristo71
Pretty sure the law they had back then before Europeans visited was if you killed the surrounding tribes, you get to use the land however you want.
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, and I’m pretty sure that “law” still applies today… and it isn’t even limited to the human race!
-->
@Greyparrot
There’s also another universally recognized rule: once within sight of a certain spot, the first person to call “Shotgun!” gets to sit in the front seat of that land.
-->
@cristo71
Eh, I guess you have a point.
Though I think the reason the US is stolen land is because the founding fathers and therefore the people related raided native american land whilst KNOWING they have been living there since long ago. It is theft if you already do acknowledge they live there.
If they think the land was never native americans' to begin with then the dispute is in the air again. I am sorry, I do not know enough US history to have a valid enough opinion on this.
-->
@Intelligence_06
The native peoples of this continent (and it’s not the only one) had intertribal battles over land and resources. There is also evidence that the native peoples of recent history took land from even earlier inhabitants in much more distant history.
So, how IS land owned? There’s a song which lays out the concept quite simply. It is titled “This Land Is My Land”:
This land is my land
It isn’t your land
I’ve got a shotgun
And you don’t got one
I’ll blow your head off
If you don’t get off
This land is private property.
-->
@cristo71
"If you have a shotgun, you can rob people who dont have a shotgun." - cristo71
You can't really steal land, I mean, where would you hide it?
-->
@cristo71
The native peoples of this continent (and it’s not the only one) had intertribal battles over land and resources.
Really?
So did every country on Earth.
Now, please try to use logic which doesnt justify every invasion in history.
There is also evidence that the native peoples of recent history took land from even earlier inhabitants in much more distant history.
Really?
So did every country on Earth.
Now, please try to use logic which doesnt justify every invasion in history.
You could have just said how you think that all invasions are justified. It would have saved us some time.
-->
@Best.Korea
If I wanted a Whopper, I would have ordered one from you, Burger.King.
-->
@cristo71
Great. No response from you.
-->
@Best.Korea
You have to admit, the idea of resolving resource and property disputes with a piece of paper was far more advanced than settling the disputes with a tomahawk to the head. It's objectively a good thing western civilization put an end to the barbarism of the native tribes.
-->
@Greyparrot
You have to admit, the idea of resolving resource and property disputes with a piece of paper was far more advanced than settling the disputes with a tomahawk to the head.
So do all those wars fought in Europe make it justified to eradicate 99% of Europeans?
Its a yes or no question, so take your time.
It's objectively a good thing western civilization put an end to the barbarism of the native tribes.
Can you explain to me how is it a good thing to eradicate 99% of the population because some group in it attacked the other group?
Go ahead.
Also, doesnt that apply to all countries on Earth, because each country has criminals in it who steal property?
The piece of paper makes no difference if people still attack each other, so common now, explain to us your "justification".
-->
@Best.Korea
Its a yes or no question, so take your time.
Absolutely yes because in the end, a piece of paper was used to resolve the conflict.
-->
@Greyparrot
a piece of paper was used to resolve the conflict.
I dont see what moral difference does piece of paper make. Maybe you think if you write something on paper, it becomes true?
Absolutely yes
So you think its justified to eradicate 99% of Europeans. Well, I guess everyone has a right to opinion, no matter how stupid or insane it is.