Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong! But you've inherited a lot of wealth from your ancestors through the very piece of land that was robbed from the lineage of the Native American who is asking to live there again, as a condition of this hypothetical scenario. So you were given an unfair advantage from it. If you didn't inherit anything, THEN it'd be fair game. You're being so elitist and are perpetuating the injustice through inheritance. Quit rationalizing your inheritance right when your own argument of fairness goes against it!
Descendants of conquered ancient tribes in America, Greece, Turkey, China, and Norway are all owed the same thing: NOTHING. NADA. ZERO. ZILCH. ZED.
You live today, you earn your way today. No one owes you anything. Get yourself out there and make yourself worthy of being paid. Otherwise, stay off my lawn!
Descendants of conquered ancient tribes in America, Greece, Turkey, China, and Norway are all owed the same thing: NOTHING. NADA. ZERO. ZILCH. ZED.
You live today, you earn your way today. No one owes you anything. Get yourself out there and make yourself worthy of being paid. Otherwise, stay off my lawn!
You're misunderstanding this question. It's regarding a conquered tribe who initially got the legal rights promised from the current government, but the current government later dishonered the rights given to them. This is way different from a tribe's government conquering another tribe and the conquered tribe never got any rights from the new government all along. In this case, the conquered tribe does indeed get owed all their property back because the government that originally gave their rights in this hypothetical situation still exists. Maybe you you read the description of my thread instead of just looking at the title.
A condition of the scenario given is that the claim isn't fake and phony and the Native Americans did have the original deed fron the same US government (since 1776, not 1600 as you accuse) as today, who just ignored the claims. I'n not saying this scenario actually happened in real life. This is just a what-if hypothetical question if it had happened.
Yeah, I don’t recognize such a deed. Adverse possession wiped it out a hundred times. It isn’t worth anything, so throw it away and get working! In this society, we respect people who achieve things on their own steam. We have contempt for those who just inherit things and often you will see such people as objects of derision and disrespect. So some 24 year old dude presenting a deed from Pocahontas and making demands is not going to cut it.
You're misunderstanding this question. It's regarding a conquered tribe who initially got the legal rights promised from the current government, but the current government later dishonered the rights given to them. This is way different from a tribe's government conquering another tribe and the conquered tribe never got any rights from the new government all along.
Actually, the government treated the Indians very well by creating reservations and allowing the continuance of their culture. That represented an evolution of the usual way of dealing with the conquered: just simply wiping them out. In any case, in 2021 no sense can be made of any of these claims. It does the claimants a service by rejecting their claims and forcing them to earn their own way in 2021. They will be better people for it. Giving them free land will only accomplish what it does when we give other people all kinds of free stuff. Making them dependent and useless and entitled and unappreciative and whiny and demanding. In short: losers.
Yeah, I don’t recognize such a deed. Adverse possession wiped it out a hundred times. It isn’t worth anything, so throw it away and get working! In this society, we respect people who achieve things on their own steam. We have contempt for those who just inherit things and often you will see such people as objects of derision and disrespect. So some 24 year old dude presenting a deed from Pocahontas and making demands is not going to cut it.
Okay, you're the jerk here because the deed under the given scenario is not from Pocahontas and is from the US government. Also, you're actually purposely perpetuating racism and inequality here because you're using excuses such as adverse possession to cover up your supposedly inherited land in this case, in which the Native Americans have every right to ALSO inherit it. Adverse possession is one of the most unfair laws ever and should be gotten rid of, as long as the parties who are involved (real estate is commonly passed along family and not strictly individual) still exist. Unless all the descendants of the original Native American deed holder are dead, adverse posession is an inherently unfair policy, not only between races, but also between fellow different parties of white English-descended people as well. The concept of adverse possession simply shouldn't exist in any country in my opinion.
Actually, the government treated the Indians very well by creating reservations and allowing the continuance of their culture. That represented an evolution of the usual way of dealing with the conquered: just simply wiping them out. In any case, in 2021 no sense can be made of any of these claims. It does the claimants a service by rejecting their claims and forcing them to earn their own way in 2021. They will be better people for it. Giving them free land will only accomplish what it does when we give other people all kinds of free stuff. Making them dependent and useless and entitled and unappreciative and whiny and demanding. In short: losers.
You're going off topic here by mentioning reservations. This question has nothing to do with reservations or self-claims from pre-US people who lived here, because it only concerns the hypothetical scenario and not necessarily reality. And before you think I totally side with the Native Americans, I don't. I know plenty of Native Americans, including those who are mixed in with white inheritance, who live in a regular property outside of the reservation because they are tired of all the rampant corruption from the tribal leaders, which are usually way more corrupt than the regular local governments in the US.
Actually, the government treated the Indians very well by creating reservations and allowing the continuance of their culture. That represented an evolution of the usual way of dealing with the conquered: just simply wiping them out. In any case, in 2021 no sense can be made of any of these claims. It does the claimants a service by rejecting their claims and forcing them to earn their own way in 2021. They will be better people for it. Giving them free land will only accomplish what it does when we give other people all kinds of free stuff. Making them dependent and useless and entitled and unappreciative and whiny and demanding. In short: losers.
Give me a break. This is a ludicrous thread, but that statement goes above and beyond.
But what if they offer to pay half of the taxes and maintenance as they should (no mortagage because already paid off by ancestors) and are nice people who get along well with you?
Give me a break. This is a ludicrous thread, but that statement goes above and beyond.
Actually, while I don't agree in many things the poster says, he/she is correct in this statement. That's because what is good is comparative and subjective. While what the US did was bad in today's standards, it was already pretty considerate in the cruel standards of the dark past. Most other governments in history just totally wiped out conquered people.
Again, many of the statements posted here don't matter as this is just a semi-scientific study trying to figure out what people think in this what-if scenario because I'm curious. Fairness doesn't exit in science or nature (besides humans with their societal constructs). However, logic and reasoning do. I'm trying to figure out the factual data of how people would respond in the controlled case of reasoning not following through, rather than what their opinion/faith believes is right or wrong. The country of the USA, its government, and most people from most other countries in general to a lesser extent have indeed gone above and beyond what is inherent to nature by creating a concept of fairness. It's just that they haven't gone far enough yet to satisfy modern standards just like Nordic countries have already. In nature, animals just eat each other alive for food for survival, and some species go extinct all the tine, and there is nothing inherently unfair or wrong with it. After all, fairness and human rights are largely arbritrary and a societal construct.
Last edited by 00crashtest; 07-06-2021 at 05:21 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
