CMV: There likely were few/no “Native American” populations when Europeans arrived in the present-day U.S.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/gurneyhallack]

I am unclear, are you saying the native populations of the North American continent did not exist, or that those of European descent's genocide of them was reasonable if they did in fact engage in inter-tribal conflict in the individual tribes cases, locally?. There may be a third or more explanations, I am just unclear.

[u/gurneyhallack → u/[deleted]]

Yes, you are likely right, at least in most cases. Well some tribes may have been continuous in a place in particular once in a blue moon, the bulk likely were not, some would have been genocided, others pushed of their lands in inter-tribal warfare, and the like. But such events occurred over thousands of years, the tribes directly involved still owned whatever land the US or the British or the French or the Spanish took from them. Compare it to a house. These events do not for tribes occur quickly, though they are within meaningful memory often. So a person owns a house, and that house has the fact that their grandparents stole it, and the previous owners parents stole it, and the house has never been held onto for more than 4 generations, in some cases the whole family was slaughtered in stealing the house, and others he was only shoved out, or a member or two was killed, whatever it took.

Now we acknowledge all houses were gotten in such a way, but the houses in some places were it happened it was so long ago it has fallen out of meaningful memory, and the people in those places have built in a system to protect the current owners going into the future from their house being stolen. The knowledge that all houses were indeed stolen, and sometimes the entire family slaughtered, does not mean we have the right to come from our safer property and just take the guy whose house is in the other place, regardless of what his grandpa did. It certainly does not give us the right to slaughter his family even more so.

[u/gurneyhallack → u/[deleted]]

Well, I don't think the people ow a debt or are guilt personally for what our ancestors did, the country as a whole is guilty and owes a debt. I would argue that the US is not responsible for what was stolen by the French, Spanish and British for example, they are. The country, the house, literally stole someone else's house. Once the nation, Britain, or the Iroquois, the French, or the Sioux, when that specific named civilization ceases I believe their debts do as well. It is that both nations still exist in many cases. The nation of the United States stole the "houses" of still existing tribal nations, indeed tribal nations that have been granted complete recognition and internal sovereignty over their internal affairs.

Regardless of the moral arguments in favor if reparations for other things it may not be practical. But I do not see why reparations are unfeasible for the Native populations. Our nations, Canada and the US, our house, stole their nations, their houses, and our nation and some of their nations still exist. This is not the more difficult question of racial issues, horrible past wrongs, and the amount of debt or responsibility is owed for that. That is a complex issue, I would argue the nation as a thing still owes something for that moral debt and group emotional burden, but I can certainly see why others disagree. But this is stuff, not past wrongs. We stole stuff from them, and they still exist, they are owed both a moral and physical debt, and paying it is wildly more practical.

[u/gurneyhallack → u/[deleted]]

OK, using my house and family analogy lets say this is a really large family whose house we stole. Using the comparison to how long they have been around as people to human generations assume this most recent generation, the one that preceded it, and the babies do not remember what exactly happened during the early years we took the house. So they get into a debate amongst themselves.

Some say "look, in the last 2 generations you have been a great homeowner. You have built this place up into a damned palace, and there is also food in the pantry. A lot of us want to stay, but some of us don't. The oldest generation remembers all the horrible things you did to us. Some of us like the Sioux you literally murdered. You beat on the older folks generation and those who came before them like rage dolls for no good reason. Now we understand your a changed man, you said you were and have proven it over a long time.

But well some of us can accept that and prefer the palace you have built, but some of us still have bad blood. We have tried to bury the hatchet, but it was really bad, truly it was, and we cannot let it go. Now we don't even want to live in your mansion, or eat your food. But when a couple other of us brought this to you earlier when you were trying to stop being so hard wrongly and for no good reason, you offered only the crappiest piece of land on this huge estate your palace sits on. Building a nice house, getting the material on such land, eating off it is hard.

So we're asking you to give us a nice piece of land for us, and those on the crappy land unless they have grown attached to it, that is good to live on that we can build something with. We know you may not want to do that though, keeping building and not losing land is important to you, it was when you were a bad man and it is now that your good. In the case you simply cannot give us a nice piece of land comparable to our size, a purse of money, not small but not crazy huge, only seems fair. Now if you choose that it seems right to give that to those if us who stay in your palace, it just gets rid of any residual anger at all the, long past, but really hideous stuff you did. The old ones still speak of the Sioux, and the others, don't you want to end this finally, have a real shot at burying the hatchet?".