Huh? Because they didn’t have written land deeds recorded at the county courthouse it didn’t belong to them? |
A tribe can only hold onto land until a stronger tribe comes along and takes it from them. That's the way of the world. No, we're not giving our land back to tribes that couldn't hold onto it in the first place. |
You and your racist children are. |
Assuming you are the first person I asked the question- it is your contention that the settlers from the 1620s held the same ideals as the framers 150 years later AND that these ideals of "freedom and justice" were "never, not once, within the founding spirit of any prior society"? |
Question here, would you support more modern day colonization? If the US is a "stronger tribe" why do we not just go overtake a lot more land mass than we already have? We are getting crowded and low on natural resources....why not go take them? |
Why did the US support England in WWII? |
Not the PP you’re asking, but of course not. It’s a dumb question. I’m not sure humanity is “progressing” in a purely linear way toward being more just or generally “better” in a moral sense than we used to be. But big picture you can certainly make that argument. Rights of women, minorities, disableds, etc across the board improved. Most countries and cultures are far more respectful of others—even absolute vitriolic racists and very bad people are a hell of a lot gentler than they used to be. And the vast majority of countries (excluding religious ethnostate autocracies) are downright kind. We spend trillions on welfare both inside and outside our own borders. We’ve developed laws and frameworks for protecting minority rights. Tech advances mean we’re not killing each other for things like water and food. Global capitalism is responsible for like 90% of this btw. So yeah, the rules are different now. But we’re not going to launch into decades of global givesies backsies where everybody and their brother has a sob story. |
The PP I was asking wrote "That's the way of the world". Present tense. That is why I was asking and why it is not a dumb question. You are saying it was past tense, which is different. |
Not PP you’re asking but also no. Conquering other nations is generally difficult and not worth the high cost (look at US in Iraq/Afghanistan and Russia in Ukraine). We are also not running out of space or resources. For those resources that we are low on, it is more profitable to trade than to conquer. |
No, there is nothing wrong, at all, with a day of gratitude. |
This! Focus on treating people well in the here and now. |
Life is not fair. How did you miss that lesson? |
Trust me if we needed to, we would. The same way if your children were hungry, you'd steal from your neighbor. |
But what does it mean to "need to." Did the early settlers "need to" take over this land? And later did the British government "need to" formally invade and take over? I read the PP as saying that it is "the way of the world" for people to just take what they want as long as they have the force to do it. |
It’s almost as if people don’t realize that rising above our base instincts is what makes us human. |