Reply to Haverford v. Swarthmore

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Haverford v. Swarthmore"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]“Last year when I toured with my kid it was the only school that started the tour with an acknowledgement of stolen land AND made us wear masks on the tour even while outside. To me it felt a bit much.“

We’re registered Dems and it’s too much for us, too. I guess it’s very generational, but I also find that the more white the organization, the more likely there are these performative declarations. Will be visiting both next week.[/quote]

2 other schools that have the land acknowledgement in recent visits:

Michigan
Colorado State

All govt sponsored meetings in Australia (both parties) start with a land acknowledgement.  It is totally a thing.[/quote]

UVA stolen land plus slaves lived under this building. So performative. Obnoxious. Give it back then. [/quote]

I do not know exactly where I stand on land acknowledgment.  It does seem performative.  But there is a wide gap between “go back to how things were 500 years ago” and acknowledging that there was harm done to the original Americans.

What we choose to celebrate does say a lot about us.  If we decide we no longer wish to honor confederate generals, that indicates that society is moving toward a different understanding of its past.  Same with the land acknowledgment.  Doesn’t mean that to contextualize our past and our history means that we have to give up our present.  [/quote]

The irony is that the original Americans weren't exactly peace-loving people. Any existing tribes at the time of the first colonial settlements replaced earlier tribes through warfare and conquests and wars among the tribes were commonplace enough. So who was really the "first" is always an unknown. [/quote]

There is no irony, what happened on this continent before Europeans got here doesn't matter at all. (And why do people feel the need to bring this crap into any thread where native Americans are mentioned?) Europeans decided that they were [u]entitled [/u] to take over America because the people on this continent were both culturally inferior and as heathens, not endowed by God to manage the fruits of the land. They made an argument based on white/Christian/European supremacy, not the traditional historical argument of different groups of people meeting and either merging or fighting to see who would win and that argument cannot be used post hoc. [u]Modern [/u]Europeans decided to treat people in the Americas and Africa and Australia like lesser beings to justify the seizure and extraction of natural resources. I'm so sick of this "people everyone fight each other for land" argument. All exploration on this continent was justified based on cultural supremacy, not military supremacy. [/quote]

Regardless of whatever justifications any of them might have stated, Europeans were going to take whatever they could through whatever means they could.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics