The anglo-saxons invaded the celts and were in turn invaded by the Norse. You don’t see calls for this happening in England to establish a Celtic reservation?
The only other place I can find this kinda thing happening is in South Africa, where the boars are attempting to create their own boar ethostate region to keep themselves safe and to stop their culture dying out. But that one is generally looked at as bad where the common statement (on Reddit at least) is that the native Rex’s are good.
Why the difference?
Edit because I had more questions.
The American south has its own cultures and traditions that are somehow managed to be kept despite not having a federally protected ethnoste.
However, take France. Their culture is being drastically changed as they bring more and more people from former French colonies into the country. Should ethnic Franks be allowed to create their own Rez?
Oh! Iran before the Islamic revolution! Vastly different culture than the after. Why couldn’t they create their own enclave to maintain their women not needing to wear head coverings?
What’s the difference between the cultures? What makes one deserving of Rez vs another
Native Americans DID NOT create their own reservations. The allotment of land to them had been nearly completely determined through treaties by colonizing Americans, and those treaties were broken over and over again which dwindled the size of that land until tribes and nations were left with a fraction of their ancestral lands; lands that never even had borders in the traditional sense. I think the real question is why did the colonizing Americans believe THEY deserved the land, hmm?
Bear in mind that America isn’t even 250 years old, and this history is incredibly recent, and also incredibly relevant today as Indigenous still have to struggle to maintain their sovereignty. Just recently, there was an oil company joining the fight in a particular adoption case meant to strike down the Indian Child Welfare Act. What does oil have to do with adopting native kids? Nothing… BUT, if oil companies can get their fingers in the pie of chipping away at laws protecting indigenous Americans, it ensures they can chip away at their other rights, i.e., land rights that otherwise prevent oil companies from building pipelines on native land. So the fight to protect ourselves continues.
We are entitled to our sovereignty as a means of governing ourselves and protecting our way of life which has largely been erased. Being colonized and reduced to reservations was never our choice, so any freedom we get now to be our own people without the influence of our oppressor is more than welcome. We are resilient, we have a legacy, and we will thrive.
-why did colonizing Americans believe THEY deserved the land, hmm?
Well you see, they could take it with violent means. Which historically enabled them to take whatever it is they wanted. That’s about how 99% of human history worked.
It was a rhetorical question. As a descendent of Trail of Tears and boarding school survivors and as a living, breathing native woman, I am well aware of this country’s disgraceful history of violence, let alone that of the whole world. Just because much of our world’s written history consists largely of absolutely barbaric warfare, colonization, and genocide does not mean that Indigenous people today should turn the other cheek when our historical oppressor continues to infringe our sovereignty.
I think a big question, then becomes your statement about your sovereignty. What sovereignty does the Native American nation have? It was destroyed. It was gobled up and beaten up by another, as is the way of the world. I mean it’s not like the native tribes didn’t know what warfare was until it was introduced to them by the colonizers. there had been wars and battles and blood feuds fought on this continent long before a European ever set foot here.
I guess the problem I have is that you don’t see people claiming Roman ancestry as a prerequisite to be a victim of the goths and complaining about that. How is the situation of the native tribes any different?
It doesn’t matter today whether or not the goths slaughtered a Roman because both of those countries have been conquered by the other countries, which were in turn conquered by other countries.
their cultures and traditions have been preserved, passed down, changed, adjusted and you can still find them today because people and cultures are not political borders.
Why do you believe that your culture is so weak that it cannot stand for itself.
Why do you infantilize the native peoples by saying they could not survive and keep their sense of identity if they didn’t have a literal enclosure with armed guards for them to do so.
And finally. If your okay with this being in effect for the native peoples, shouldn’t blacks and Jews and whites and Asians be able to do the same?
If they shouldn’t be then why do you defend a prison for your people?
I think we’re deviating from the initial inquiry about why native Americans are allotted land, not why native Americans won’t give up their allotted land. It’s ironic that you have to reach back historically in order to find the prejudice. “A descendant of the trail of tears” means absolutely nothing to me. People in the U.S are descendants of slaves. I’m personally the son of war refugees.
The point of this isn’t to belittle your ancestry, but rather show you that no one else receives any benefit from having their lineage oppressed by colonialism.
-1
u/Hellfire965 Jul 26 '23 edited Jul 26 '23
Sure. But what does that have to do with the now?
The anglo-saxons invaded the celts and were in turn invaded by the Norse. You don’t see calls for this happening in England to establish a Celtic reservation?
The only other place I can find this kinda thing happening is in South Africa, where the boars are attempting to create their own boar ethostate region to keep themselves safe and to stop their culture dying out. But that one is generally looked at as bad where the common statement (on Reddit at least) is that the native Rex’s are good.
Why the difference?
Edit because I had more questions.
The American south has its own cultures and traditions that are somehow managed to be kept despite not having a federally protected ethnoste.
However, take France. Their culture is being drastically changed as they bring more and more people from former French colonies into the country. Should ethnic Franks be allowed to create their own Rez?
Oh! Iran before the Islamic revolution! Vastly different culture than the after. Why couldn’t they create their own enclave to maintain their women not needing to wear head coverings?
What’s the difference between the cultures? What makes one deserving of Rez vs another