The colonial relationships argument in the post above is a good one. The fact that your ancestors put down roots on an island doesn't inherently give you rights to that island, but hundreds of years of colonial development depriving a population of wealth definitely gives that people the right to reparations, and all people definitely have the right to self determination.

[–] oliveoil@hexbear.net 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"all people definitely have the right to self determination."

Embrace Morgenthau thought. Reject German right to self determination.

[–] stink@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What does this mean sorry

[–] oliveoil@hexbear.net 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

After WW2, some had doubts the Germans could be trusted with a country.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

and they are proven correct, but they didnt go far enough. none of the euros can be trusted with a country, JDPON is the only solution.

[–] rentasintorn@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 2 months ago

Dawg I've been reading about the Holocaust and I'm just blown away by the full societal buy-in: thousands of camp guards, support staff, company foreman over slave labor, factories built by camps for the labor.

Like, I don't see how you can continue with a national project that lead to so much of that nation being willing participants (to be clear this applies to the U$ and and a number of other national projects).

[–] RiotDoll@hexbear.net 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'd like a process that attacks Ancient Claims that's sensitive to the fact that some of them are legitimate.

Like, native tribes have a case, israel and... whatever is going on with Greenland do not.

if the last time there was a state headed by x people was literally thousands of years ago, and the people have been vacated that long, it's pretty hard to be serious about it.

if those people still live on their lands in diminished fashion? if they're still around and still live downstream of oppression meant to keep them under thumb? if they were displaced in a one-sided colonial war and genocide? yeah, the least that can be done is restoring lands to their rightful owner (the descendants of the ones robbed and murdered) - i can abide that. i think that would be cool. If a tribal coalition had ambitions to rule the PNW i'd be like hell yeah motherfuckers can i hellp?

but then it's like, the diaspora set in motion in the first fucking century CE can't reasonably claim a fucking thing about Palestine. Nor is "white people were a present on Greenland once a thousand years ago" valid at all.

but if you're a group affected by such Ancient Claim it's easy to invest yourself if you're predisposed to it. Kind of a scary amount of momentum as desperate but privileged people start looking for a frontier opportunity to escape the troubles back home... it's not legitimate but i'd love to see that shit in the context of an articulated deconstruction+destruction of the premise.

[–] Euergetes@hexbear.net 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'd like a process that attacks Ancient Claims that's sensitive to the fact that some of them are legitimate

the land claims of colonized peoples are not ancient, and they're borne of ongoing injustice. we need to be very strict about not allowing cynical asymmetrical analogies to be considered in the same category.

israeli claims are not anything like the klamath wanting their land back which was stolen less than 300 years ago, from a nation that still oppresses them. israeli claims are like a nahua guy showing up to the navajo reservation demanding they give him aztlán

[–] RiotDoll@hexbear.net 10 points 2 months ago

Sorry, right. That's what i was trying to articulate

[–] Lussy@hexbear.net 15 points 2 months ago

It’s just muddying the waters for anyone who actually cares about colonialism

[–] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 2 months ago

blood quantum but woke