I thought about it but I couldn’t think of a proper answer.
I guess it would make the most sense to let the colonized decide what to do with the colonizers, since they are the victims.
And what would happen with the people that were brought in as slaves by the colonizers?
I hope someone smarter than me can explain 🙏🥺
Indigenous people didn’t go extinct or leave. They are alive across the continent in reservations and in settler communities. I’m not defending their right moralistically, it’s materially necessary. It is settlers and the horrible land use and environmental practices inherent to settler colonialism that is driving us into the ground. The only reason we’re still existing is because immense amounts of resources stolen from the global south. If we are going to face our great environmental challenges like climate change the people who have lived here for millennia who understand how this land works will need ownership of the resources.
sure but that doesnt make their claim to land where other people are living more legitimate the fact that just about all indigenous communities in north america were displaced doesnt give them the right to displace others or to rule over others
Have you not be reading Kaffe’s comments? Settlers only live on a very small part of this continent. Very little of this land is actually in use beyond unsustainable resource extraction, yet indigenous people are barred from living the way they have for thousands of years. Even where non-native people do live a lot of the space is wasted. Around one fifth of cities is just parking. People are spread out in highly inefficient and environmentally damaging suburbs. If public transportation and better housing and agriculture is invested in we have plenty of space even for a decent expansion of settler population with good living standards without expanding. No one needs to be kicked out. It is the settler colonial mindset of our people killing and deporting others that makes us think that if the other side could they would. In fact that was part of the original genocidal alibi. We also get into “white genocide” and “great replacement theory” territory. They are not like us, they are better.
the guy saying that white people dont deserve sovereignty and that democracy is bad? yeah i have read his comments. either way in many many cases the lands that indigenous people claim are (not coincidentally) where white people built their cities. so the argument that these claims do not conflict is just nonsense and granting these claims would mean displacing millions of people so again how can that possibly be justified.
They’re not saying that white people don’t deserve sovereignty or democracy, they are saying they don’t deserve to control this land just because they conquered it. Might does not make right. These people deserve reparations for the genocide inflicted upon them. We settlers should not have control over indigenous people and their land just because there are more of us. “To a former oppressor, equality feels like oppression.” You know how the Soviets got to implement their system in the land liberated from the Nazis? I think this situation is somewhat analogous. I have never heard a single indigenous person suggest displacing large amounts of non-natives. When the people at the Red Nation were asked about it they said they hadn’t even considered, people who ask questions like that are just afflicted with settler ideology. The same line of thinking that leads to great replacement theory. You say landback people want to take back whole cities, do you have any sources on this? All I can think of is First Nations people protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline as it runs through the land that should be theirs, is very damaging, and steals further from them. Another example of landback movements would be the “water is life” movement trying to take back water ways that are legally theirs to stop environmental degradation. I’m starting to think you’re debating in bad faith, with how little you seem to consider my points.
literally and i do mean that word read the comment above yours. like wtf is this gas lighting shit you are on its literally their fucking words, wtf. and are u seriously pretending u cant think of a single case where white people made treaties with indigenous people granting them certain places and then broke said treaties and took the land anyways and built cities there thats like the entire history of the usa.
Kaffe literally just said that settlers deserve democracy but we don’t have a right to a sovereign state. Just as in Palestine Israel has no right to exist. Jews can live in Palestine and have peacefully for millennia, but that doesn’t mean they can just start up a monopoly on violence (state) and start stealing land and killing people, neither should a Zionist entity exist at all after that one dissolves.
What does that have to do with what I said? If you’re suggesting First Nations would subject colonizers to the same treatment they suffered under you’d be wrong, falling for the trap of colonial ideology and “white genocide” fear mongering.
Colonizers do not deserve sovereignty in their colonies, even if they were born in them. Sovereignty meaning the exception on violence and the exercise of law. And I didn’t say they wouldn’t have democracy or representation, but that like every AES they won’t immediately have one person one vote, a political version of from each according to their works. Settlers, like AES workers, will have political rights in their workplaces and other revolutionary institutions that advance the interests of women, youth, LGBTQ+, artists, students, etc., and will have rights to manage their territories through democratic means. Their common interests with other nations will be decided through the decolonial state, where they will have representation (like how Taiwan province will be integrated).
We will only deport white supremacists, as necessary to defend the revolution. Though, land usage changes and conservation efforts will be strictly enforced, so many people will relocate into denser neighborhoods.
Honestly, from where I personally sit, they really don’t between the histories of Amerika, Britain, the Nordics, and everyone else who’s been raping, pillaging, and plundering Africa and the Global South for what feels like the past 500 years; but the aim is to be better than global crackery.
I’ve been watching your takes ever since these kinds of topics started being discussed here, and I’ve gotta agree with QueerCommie. I don’t think you’re arguing these points in good faith at all; for your username to be what it is, you peddle out the same kind of tripe that aggrieved settlers do, so understand that this is not an opening for dialogue, because I’m frankly not interested in dialogue with people who talk like settlers do. This is your wake-up call for self-evaluation and self-crit.